Friday, January 16, 2009

When is a bridge not a bridge?

I think I must have been asleep when this question was answered ...

In yesterday's Western Leader, a brief article was published on the "Second Whau bridge proposal", where it was stated: "The Whau River already has one bridge, the north-western motorway at Te Atatu."

Oh. Okay ...

I emailed the letters editor of the paper this morning, something I do rarely these days.
Dear Sir,

Your brief article on Thursday 15 January was headed up "Second Whau Bridge Proposal" and states: "The Whau River already has one bridge, the north-western motorway at Te Atatu."

I can't see how the motorway causeway across the river is counted as a Whau River bridge, where the 1930s bridge at Great North Road and the 1970s bridge at Ash and Rata Streets are not. This would mean that the new proposal is for a fourth Whau Bridge crossing, surely, not a second.

Yours faithfully,

Lisa J. Truttman
Strictly speaking, the rail bridge at the confluence of the Whau and Avondale creeks is the first of four existing crossings of the river, bank to bank, but I'll stick with the three across the river proper.


Update: letter published.

3 comments:

  1. Good thing you didn't mention the rail bridge, as that would have confused them even more - strictly speaking, isn't the new rail structure two separate bridges?

    So would that make the proposed bridge the fifth, or sixth crossing? :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Heh! Extremely good point, jafazero!

    ReplyDelete