Heritage is not an Absolute

In yesterday's StarPhoenix  (Oct 18, 2010, A8) James D. Winkel attempts to expound the virtues of saving our heritage.  He beings his comments on the basis there are only two points of view regarding saving the bridge.  Keep it or Tear it down.  Then he enters into a lecture on how historical significance must be considered equal to the structural integrity of the bridge itself.  Yet another opinion that expresses an "at whatever the cost" attitude.  And today the Star publishes the results of an Insightrix poll with the slant that people are still divided on what should happen because only 43% want a new flat bridge while 40% want a steel bridge.  Why can't these people get the reporting right.  The way I add it up 43% want a concrete structure, 20% want a steel truss replica and 13% want a signature bridge.  This adds up to 76% respondents saying NO to keeping the original bridge. This is a huge majority that don't want to keep the existing structure and should be the catalyst in stopping all the nonsense of keeping a piece of garbage as a part of our road system.  As to the thought of turning it over to pedestrians and cyclists was overwhelming 80% against that notion.  I plead to the powers that be that they view the information correctly. 

As for the results of the open houses and the information the city receives at these staged events I wouldn't trust one iota of the comments as representing an overall view of the city.  But maybe the one number that should be trusted  is the percentage or residence that come out to these set-ups.  I would hesitate to think it would be less that 1% of the population of Saskatoon.  Not exactly an endorsement of the process.

The only answer now should be options as where the next "NEW" bridge should be placed.  Sorry Nutana your bridge may not be the most important to our ever expanding traffic system.