Skyscraper Ad

Signature Ad

Sign -Driving Miss Daisy

Signature Ad

Skyscraper

Big Box / Belluz Farms

News
Click here to see more
Subscribe
Community Calendar
Click here for full listings.
Poll
The city is considering a request that it waive taxes on the Confederation College residences. Would you support such a move?


Total Votes: 306
View Results Past Polls
User Submitted Photo Gallery
Submit Your Own Photos
2014-03-20 at 16:10

Bridge assessment

By Jamie Smith, tbnewswatch.com
91.5 CKPRWin Lunch with Danny and Laura for up to 20 people! Enter here to win on Thunder Bays Best Music 91.5 CKPRClick Here!

An assessment of the James Street swing bridge is still underway, officials with CN Rail said Thursday.

Scaffolding has been put up under the bridge and workers are on scene, but spokeswoman Lindsey Fedchyshyn said it's all part of an assessment that's expected to be completed at the end of March.

"There really isn't anything significant in terms of repairs going on, they're still assessing the bridge," she said Thursday in response to reports that the bridge is being repaired since a fire closed it to vehicle traffic last October.

Consultants have been brought on to help CN complete a report, which will tell the railway what the next steps are and what should be done with the bridge.

That information will be shared with the city of Thunder Bay and Fort William First Nation.

"We will absolutely be keeping all stakeholders up to date on next steps," Fedchyshyn said.

Click here to submit a letter to the editor.

Click here to report a typo or error

Tbnewswatch.com(16)

Banner/Vector Construction

Comments

We've improved our comment system.
RicknB says:
So, they waited for warmer weather to inspect the bridge!
Pathetic!

What is the accident count at so far?
3/20/2014 4:36:42 PM
sky high says:
Take your time guys, take your time. Even if it takes a decade. We have to think of the safety of our citizens.
3/20/2014 5:47:01 PM
donnybrook says:
Keep it closed. Its nice being able to cross James street when driving on Gore without having to wait for fifty vehicles to pass.
3/20/2014 7:37:15 PM
Rock49 says:
This is pathetic. I'd love to see rail service delayed for 4 months.
3/20/2014 8:44:24 PM
freepostg says:
I agree with donnybrook. Keep it closed, I have no problem giving the car a little run by going out to the highway. My understanding is that the railway owns the bridge, if their trains can go over safely, that's all I care about.
3/20/2014 10:58:36 PM
Sugar says:
Safety is first
3/20/2014 11:27:47 PM
jonthunder says:
I do not recall learning of the agreement between the city of Thunder Bay and the Railway. Why will one of the parties not divulge the terms and conditions of the agreement? Surely it would outline the duties and rights of the parties and how such could be changed or terminated. Does the city have a legal leg to stand?
3/21/2014 6:28:50 AM
smartguy83 says:
Many quotes from FWFN and the City indicate that CN does NOT have the obligations many people have mentioned on this site.
3/21/2014 10:56:56 AM
mystified says:
Nothing is carved in stone and even if it was it can be changed. This so called agreement isn't the gospel.
Close this bridge permanently to automobiles as it was built for the trains to access the industries not a short cut to gas and cigarettes.
3/21/2014 8:45:58 AM
Tannoy says:
CN owns the bridge, they can do what they want with it. Deal with it. Cry and Cry all you want but it wont change a thing, CN owns it, not you, its not your RIGHT to use it, its CN's choice to let you.
3/21/2014 9:42:31 AM
Synical says:
Untrue. It is not their choice, not when they're held to a still legal and binding contract. Please note the key word. 'Perpetuity'.
Tbnewswatch.com

3/21/2014 1:12:17 PM
hadenough says:
While an interesting document, and thank you for sharing, please note the signatory line; Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company. Not Canadian National Railway.

The company (GTPR) was started in 1905 and defaulted on federal loans in 1920 and was nationalized and eventually absorbed by CN. Is this agreement still valid or not?

Bet CN could find a train load of lawyers that would claim that it isn't.
3/21/2014 9:52:30 PM
S Duncan says:
We don't need no stinkin team of lawyers. I'm Scott Duncan! I can handle it.

actually this is one area where I don't know how that would play out. If GTPR was dissolved due to bankruptcy then I would think that this agreement is no longer valid, but if it was absorbed into CN without claiming bankruptcy then it may still be valid.

Then again bankruptcy back then and now are probably 2 very different concepts.

Id guess since Hobbs finally shut his cakehorn this agreement is null and void and now he knows it.
3/22/2014 8:44:58 AM
Tannoy says:
That company no longer exists, but please go wave that around at CN, see how far it gets ya. Again, stomp your feet, protest, complain, scream, punch a wall, whatever your gonna do wont change a thing.
3/22/2014 12:47:30 PM
jonthunder says:
Thank You for posting an excerpt from the bridge agreement between the railway and city. It would be helpful to see the rest of the agreement and any side understandings if any exist. Does in perpetuity mean for as long as the railway uses the bridge for rail traffic it must provide other transit means? Clearly such a structure is not expected to last forever....
3/21/2014 4:47:14 PM
Comments for this story are semi-moderated. Read our comment guideline.

Add a new comment.
You must log in to add comments.
Create a new account
Forgot password?
Log In