The Battle of the Bridge: The Shoal Harbour Causeway Bridge - From Construction to Controversy towards Completion
Bridge Background
Constructed in 1963, as part of the Bonavista Highway, the Shoal Harbour Causeway and the Bridge that spanned the Shoal Harbour river provided a critical and efficient link to the Bonavista peninsula and the rest of the island.
The 34-meter two-lane concrete girder bridge rests on 5 full-span girders resting on two large concrete abutments. In addition to traffic, the bridge also carries a large municipal water line and electrical conduit.
Throughout its lifetime, the bridge was regularly inspected and upgraded. Two major pieces of rehabilitation work were completed on the bridge by the provincial department of transportation in 1986 and 2006. The Provincial government had the bridge recorded on its provincial bridge database (it has since been removed). When the record existed, it was noted that the bridge was coming due for replacement.
Until the mid-1980s, the Shoal Harbour Causeway bridge was the only road link to the Bonavista peninsula. In 1985 a second route was added by a new 12km Clarenville bypass road and an overpass was installed on the TCH, 8km west of Clarenville.
In 1994 the Towns of Clarenville and Shoal Harbour became one and with the changes in the Town's boundaries and road rights and obligations, the responsibility for the bridge became muddied. This was further complicated in 1995 when a second bridge was constructed at the end of Harbour Drive. The construction of Shoal Harbour Drive in 2004 connected to this bridge and significantly changed traffic flow, away from the causeway and through a new route that connected Manitoba Drive to Balbo Drive/Route 230 to the Bonavista peninsula.
With more routes coupled with the growth of the town in the past two decades, there has been a significant increase in overall traffic volumes and emphasized the value of both bridges. Town-sponsored traffic studies have shown that over 12,000 vehicles a day now cross the Shoal Harbour River.
Spring 2018 - The Trouble Begins
In March of 2018, a routine engineering assessment of the Shoal Harbour Causeway bridge concluded that the ocean-facing abutment of the bridge posed a significant safety risk. At an emergency meeting of the Council, the decision was made to at least temporarily close the bridge to vehicle traffic. Later in July of 2018, upon further study and engineering advice, Council made the decision to open the bridge to a single lane of weight-restricted traffic. That remains the case to the present day.
Until 1994-1995 it was clear that the Causeway and Bridge had been owned and maintained by the province, as part of the Bonavista Peninsula highway. The Bridge remained listed on the province’s bridge database right up to 2018 - and was only removed after the Bridge was shuttered.
The Town argued that the bridge and the cost of its replacement was a provincial responsibility, but the province disagreed. A lot of time and effort was spent determining the ownership. The Town argued that with no evidence of a formal transfer agreement, the bridge was the Province's however the province argued that letters were exchanged as part of the 1994 Clarenville-Shoal Harbour amalgamation agreement that brought the bridge into the new town boundaries and as such, the enlarged Town became responsible for the bridge.
The Long Road to Getting the Bridge Fixed
While still disputing ownership, the Town did move to determine the approximate cost of replacing the bridge and to determine what was best to replace it with. Towards this, in July of 2019, the Town awarded a $48,000-contract for preliminary engineering work. This report was delivered in September 2019 and offered several replacement options with differing costs and lifespan estimates. From it, the Town decided on a concrete girder bridge with a pedestrian way (the same as the existing bridge). The then estimated price tag of $3.1+ million was felt to offer the best value.
Who Pays?
$3 million is a big bill and it represents more than three years' worth of capital roadwork for Clarenville. Figuring out how to pay for this, while maintaining the remaining town roads and tax rates have been a Council preoccupation for the past four years.
Leaving the debate over ownership aside, in the Fall of 2019 Council, in a show of good faith committed to seeking a fair cost-sharing arrangement with the other two levels of government. Towards this, Council committed up to $1.25 million towards Clarenville’s share of the bridge replacement and applied for joint capital works funding through the Province. It was not until July of 2020 that the Town was notified that its application for funding under the province’s capital works program was rejected.
Despite the setback, work continued to lobby both levels of government for a cost-sharing arrangement. Next, Clarenville sought Federal help and applied for funding under the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP).
In August 2021 this funding effort paid off. Through the ICP program, the Town of Clarenville secured a funding agreement that sees the Town, Federal and Provincial governments split the cost of the bridge on a one-third basis - with the Town responsible for any cost overruns. The estimated cost of the bridge replacement is now $3.8 million. The contract states that the town’s share will be $1,166,148 plus overruns.
Eventual Competition
If all goes as planned, the engineering work will bring the project into late 2022/early 2023. From there, bids for the construction of a new bridge will be solicited and then awarded. The construction will result in the closure of the causeway for the duration - which will probably take a better part of a year.
It's taking time, but it is moving forward.
pt
Hi Paul,
ReplyDeleteThis is a great summary on the background. However, I think you omitted some information regarding the first offer by the Provincial and Federal Governments to cost-share the replacement of the bridge. At that time (late 2018), a proposal was made to Council for a 67-23 ratio which was increased by another 10 per cent if the Town would assume ownership of the bridge following its replacement. This was considered a good offer since community bridges were being cost-shared at a 50/50 ratio. In response, the Town refused the offer and counter offered with a 100 per cent to be coved by Government. Unfortunately, no agreement could be reached.