Bungled Bridging?

johnboy 18 February 2009 19

It’s of great doubt as to whether Canberra even wants, or needs, pedestrian bridges over Lake Burley Griffin.

But it turns out there are plans for not one, but two of the buggers waiting to be run into by rowers and to snap the masts of the sailors.

The first is the reasonably well known immigration bridge a private concern seeking public subscriptions to build a bridge from behind the Albert Hall to the National Museum. The Canberra Times now reports that, despite keeping the money they’ve had in so far in a high yeilding term deposit, the proponents also plan to keep return just $85 of each $110 sponsorship even if the bridge doesn’t go ahead. They’re thinking they might be able to submit a Development Application (DA) in the next 18 months suggesting they’re better at TV ad campaigns and tugging on heart strings than actually building things.

But it was flagged on 666 yesterday morning, and has been picked up in the CT Today. That the Weston Park draft master plan also has a map showing a bridge from Weston Park to the Black Mountain Nature Reserve. In case you missed it (and lord knows I did), the plan went out for a month’s “consultation” in November last year and garnered around 50 responses.

But it’s OK! The ghost of Burley Griffin has been invoked, the sure sign of rogues up to no good in this town:

    “The proposed pedestrian bridge was included in the draft master plan because it was part of the original Griffin Plan for Canberra and supported by the Burley Griffin Foundation,” the spokesman said.

What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
19 Responses to Bungled Bridging?
Filter
Order
proofpositive proofpositive 8:48 pm 18 Feb 09

With Immigration Bridge Australia appearing to f**k people over by bailing out and pocketing the “administrative fee” – it really does add literal meaning to the concept of “burning ones bridges”

bd84 bd84 8:05 pm 18 Feb 09

Barney5000 said :

Why not just spend the money upgrading the park?

Or just buy some water to make the grass nice and green.

A bridge is a dumb and expensive idea.

Agreed, I don’t see that it serves any purpose, there isn’t a need a bridge so they shouldn’t be building one.

Barney5000 Barney5000 7:43 pm 18 Feb 09

Why not just spend the money upgrading the park?

Or just buy some water to make the grass nice and green.

A bridge is a dumb and expensive idea.

Hells_Bells74 Hells_Bells74 2:13 pm 18 Feb 09

All the good things go to the feds.. then the fate/money is decided/stolen by the Rothschilds/Rockefellas/Murdochs etc in the end and we all know how great they are *rolls eyes*!

Then it becomes bad!

Izzyduck Izzyduck 1:45 pm 18 Feb 09

youami:
Griffin Legacy is a Federal Gov. matter. Federal Gov. removed most of the funding & so lots now won’t be done. Check National Capital Authority website.

youami youami 1:25 pm 18 Feb 09

I don’t have a problem with new bridges if they serve a purpose –even if one of the bridges is purely symbolic– but to consistently claim that they have to be built because it is all part of the Griffin plan is wearing thin especially when the plan is being tagged as an excuse to build something or not to build something. Firstly, the Griffin plan had light rail and heavy rail to the city centre and also Constitution Av was the Champs-Élysées of Canberra and the main east-west axis. Now these things would be more practical and server more a purpose but haven’t been built yet. It was also not a plan for a city of 340,000-odd people. Secondly, Parkes Way (amongst other things) has never been in the plan and accordingly should never have been built, especially as it goes against Griffin’s ideas for city folk to have easy access to the parklands and lake from the city centre. Anyway, build the bridge if it needs to be built but the claim that is has to be built to satisfy some archaic legacy in the form of a early 1900s plan that is just plain stupid.

On a side note, I feel sorry for the poor souls who have to build the bridges as they might get wet doing it and with all the algae… 🙂

peterh peterh 1:09 pm 18 Feb 09

dexi said :

“high enough to be fun to jump off?”

Now you are talking. Hopefully it will be deep enough to splash down.

as opposed to jumping of the very short pier near the ymca sailing club?

dexi dexi 12:09 pm 18 Feb 09

“high enough to be fun to jump off?”

Now you are talking. Hopefully it will be deep enough to splash down.

p1 p1 11:35 am 18 Feb 09

Hopfully these bridges will be bicycle accessable, and high enough to be fun to jump off?

deye deye 11:05 am 18 Feb 09

The Weston bridge would probably be a good thing and useful.

captainwhorebags captainwhorebags 11:01 am 18 Feb 09

I think the second bridge (Weston Park to Blk Mountain Peninsula) will be more useful than the immigration bridge, and should be cheaper too. Of course the immigration bridge is more a symbol than a thoroughfare.

peterh peterh 10:39 am 18 Feb 09

Pommy bastard said :

But it turns out there are plans for not one, but two of the buggers waiting to be run into by rowers and to snap the masts of the sailors.

Well they won’t be totally useless then.

as long as they send the video footage to australia’s funniest home videos, the humor won’t be lost…

Pommy bastard Pommy bastard 10:25 am 18 Feb 09

But it turns out there are plans for not one, but two of the buggers waiting to be run into by rowers and to snap the masts of the sailors.

Well they won’t be totally useless then.

housebound housebound 10:09 am 18 Feb 09

+1

Surely the ATO doesn’t get its hands on GST from refunded monies.

caf caf 10:01 am 18 Feb 09

What’s interesting about those figures is that apparently $10 of the $110 donation has to go to the Federal Government in GST. I would have thought that if the donation gets refunded, so would the GST, leaving only $1.50 GST on the $15 “admin fee” payable.

johnboy johnboy 9:53 am 18 Feb 09

More just a slip of the keyboard. Thank you for pointing it out, correction made.

caf caf 9:47 am 18 Feb 09

Sometimes a mistake is just a mistake, people. At least JB posts the links to his sources so we can pick them up!

proofpositive proofpositive 9:42 am 18 Feb 09

A classic tabloid RiotACT story done JB style. Get the facts and put them arse about to create sensationalism.
The proponents will keep just $15.00 not $85.00 of each $110.00 sponorship.

Izzyduck Izzyduck 9:41 am 18 Feb 09

The Admin fee & GST is actually $15 – they are going to return $85 out of the $110

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site