Govt ‘stuffed up’ Tharwa bridge project

Thumper 5 December 2007 36

Probably enough said….

However, the ABC online is reporting that Tharwa general store Val Jeffery says there should be a public inquiry into the way the ACT Government has handled the restoration of the Old Tharwa bridge, something I agree with.

The Government has announced it will now consult with the community about the bridge. Sadly the word consult coming from anyone in the ACT government means that they have already made up their mind and are now ready to take on comments, so as to ignore.

I fear that this spells the end for that grand old bridge.

RA favourite Steve Pratt actually said something of note when he commented that, “There is no need for wide consultation as Tharwans and people in the Tuggeranong Valley in their thousands have signed petitions calling for the restoration of the old bridge.”

We are being run by a bunch of muppets people….

What's Your Opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
36 Responses to Govt ‘stuffed up’ Tharwa bridge project
Skidbladnir Skidbladnir 1:41 pm 11 Dec 07

‘Consultation’ is only open until 21Dec07.

Skidbladnir Skidbladnir 1:38 pm 11 Dec 07
MelonHead MelonHead 8:22 am 07 Dec 07

Sometimes I wonder how much some forum contributors really know about anything. And how obvious it is when you read some factual content, how you can enjoy the wit that is out there, and finally how poor some content is.

In relation to the Tharwa Bridge, the comment about “use Point Hut Crossing blah blah…” is so much garbage for a long list of reasons, but mostly indicates the writer must either get free fuel and car, or can’t read a map.

The “4wd comment..” again is based on ignorance. Hands up anyone who knows how many people actually live and work south of Tharwa Bridge? Do the research, you will be surprised.

Lastly, and sadly, ANY comment about the incompetence of our government, doesn’t go close to the truth when it comes to the Tharwa Bridge. There was one day more than a year ago when it was open to traffic. The NEXT day it was closed and declared UNSAFE for pedestrians. The government “experts” have proceeded to spend a long time with their heads up their rses while the minister for potholes conjures up a plan to create a monument to his own existence where a simple one lane bridge would do the trick, with the old bridge left for pedestrians and cyclists and historians and photographers and conseration students and budding engineers and more than I would know.

Thumper is right. Something should have been done a long time ago.

Lastly, as an aside, does any one else think the work on the Gridlock Interchange is slowing? Wouldn’t this mean that it will be opened to a great fanfare about the time of the next local election….mmmm

Thumper Thumper 8:21 am 07 Dec 07

Nope, no chance of being over run by heritage buildings and items.

For a building or site to be protected under the Heritage act it needs to satisfy four criteria, those being;

Aesthetic significance
Historic significance
Social significance, and,
Cultural significance.

Therefore it is rather difficult to actually have a place or site listed for protection under the Act.

The Tharwa bridge meets all the criteria for protection, preservation and conservation, and if I may say so, the ACT government itself put the bridge on it’s own interim heritage protection list many years ago.

I draw your attention to the Burra Charter

It’s interesting.

Mælinar Mælinar 11:17 pm 06 Dec 07

From what I gather, the Romans (lets stop those pagans), and locals in need of stone did knock it down…

Although, I understand your line of talking, you were just let down by the example.

100yo stuff is still only collectable. A museum would probably not bother with it unless they were short on warehouse fillers. I daresay though if we keep on deciding that some object by virtue of it being built before federation needs to be preserved for posterity, we’d be overrun with heritage red-tape.

Thumper Thumper 2:08 pm 06 Dec 07

It’s all got to start somewhere.

Imagine if the romans some 2000 BP decided, ah stuff it Romulus, it’s just a pile of rocks, lets knock it down.

besides, the bridge predates federation and is probably one of the oldest of its size in Australia.

If we keep knocking down old stuff we’ll regret it in 100-200 years.

of course, we will all be dead from climate change by then if we listen to the doomsayers.

Mælinar Mælinar 2:03 pm 06 Dec 07

The one opened in 3000BC ?

There’s a things-in-perspective issue there.

Thumper Thumper 1:59 pm 06 Dec 07

Opened in 1895 to be precise.

Maybe Stonehenge should get flattened, after all, it’s just a big pile of rocks serving no real purpose….

Mælinar Mælinar 1:46 pm 06 Dec 07

phah to oldest bridge in Canberra. Unless a museum thinks it will draw $$$, its really not worth the wood it’s made of.

Isn’t Canberra only 50 years old anyway ? Doesn’t make it a very old bridge is all I’m saying there…

Thumper Thumper 1:39 pm 06 Dec 07

How about, oldest bridge in Canberra needs fixing. Government fixes it?

Simple really.

Mælinar Mælinar 1:33 pm 06 Dec 07

mmmxactly what I was talking about. Govt builds the new bridge, uber protectionist locals get to keep shards of their old one to look at and gaze in wonder on their own dollar.

V twin venom V twin venom 10:48 am 06 Dec 07

Nice one wombat. The bridge over Turallo Creek in Bungendore is going to be replaced after a fair bit of community uproar and consultation regarding the ‘heritage value’ of the old timber bridge. The outcome is a new steel and concrete structure that goes some way towards resembling the old one.

hairy nosed wombat hairy nosed wombat 10:34 am 06 Dec 07

Has anyone been to Cowra. when they replaced their bridge, they put a section of the old bridge in the park next to the river, and built a brand spanking new bridge (Well brand new 1986 when it was built).

The end result, the town got a new bridge, and the old bridge was preserved for future generations.

Now does Thawra have a park next to the River?

chester chester 9:39 am 06 Dec 07

“this whole fiasco reeks of payback for Val embarrassing Stanhope and Co for all their collective stuff ups and buck passing during and after the Jan 2003 fires.”


Petty vindictiveness by Little Jon and his dumbass twat sidekick has proven to be the raison d’être of this sorry excuse for a government time and time again. What a sad pathetic little man he is.

Thumper Thumper 8:31 am 06 Dec 07

“wooden bridges have been replaced everywhere?”

Ah, in a word, no.

NSW has a whole bunch of people within their dept of roads and transport who specifically look after old wooden bridges.

VYBerlinaV8 VYBerlinaV8 8:55 pm 05 Dec 07

Don’t those Tharwans all drive big tough 4WDs anyway? Let them cross the river the way God intended…

Vic Bitterman Vic Bitterman 8:28 pm 05 Dec 07

Good old Val the whinger (insert “Rolling eyes” emoticon here : please can this site be changed to using phpBB???).

Nothing wrong with going the Point Hut Crossing way. It’s a road, it gets you to work, it gets you home. If that’s flooded you go the real long way, or you enjoy the day off.

cranky cranky 5:59 pm 05 Dec 07

I’m not sure Tharwa-ites are insisting on a rebuilt wooden bridge.

I suspect any bloody bridge would do.

Why has it taken so long to come to a fairly predictable decision? We are being poorly served by this bunch of arogant fools.

Mr Evil Mr Evil 5:50 pm 05 Dec 07

Ewww, Punt – that sound rude!

Pandy Pandy 5:33 pm 05 Dec 07

A rebuilt bridge? Unless they build it from conrete and steel fake beams, the new bridge incorporating all new components will be white anted in 30 to 40 years.

Don’t the hysterical mob in Tharwa know that wooden bridges have been replaced everywhere?

Geez these nostalgia nutters would have us waiting to cross the Clyde in a bloody punt!

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Region Group Pty Ltd

Search across the site