NOAH'S BRIDGE FAILURE - A timeline of inaction
COMMENT

A comment piece by Lawrence Mason
The Noah Bridge saga goes back over twenty years... In December 2003 the Daintree Cape Tribulation Tourism Association wrote to Douglas Shire Council asking about the 10-ton load restriction.
But it wasn’t in fact until 2010 and 2013 (when FGF Machinery fell through the bridge, twice) that significant work was done to the bridge, causing traffic disruptions, including total bridge closures, which resulted in much lost business for residents to the north.
Again in 2015 there were closures for resealing; NDRAA work from the 2014 flooding.
DSC planned a replacement bridge and in early 2017 many of us wrote letters of support. They added steel bracing to the bridge, with little disruption. The 2017 grant application was successful. But trouble was brewing.
In 2017, DSC considered issues in relation to a new bridge, including tenure.
Initially they decided the new bridge would be built over the old one, eliminating some issues, but locals were concerned that a temporary crossing would wash out.
Many times, the scaffolding used to repair the bridge has suffered that fate. I wrote to DSC in August 2017 asking about this and we were advised that the new bridge would go upstream of the old one, allowing access during the build.
Hydrology studies were carried and in May 2018 Council advised that the successful tenderer must maintain vehicle access.
DSC May 2018:
Construction is tentatively planned between June and December 2019 but until a contractor is appointed, these timeframes cannot be confirmed.
In September 2018 DSC announced they had appointed NQ Civil Contractors. The new bridge has actually been constructed to a point and has been stored by DSC since sometime in 2019.
DSC May 2019:
The proposal is to built a new crossing upstream of the existing bridge...Council is hopeful construction will commence this year, however, until the permits are received, a definite schedule cannot be provided.
At the time everyone was fairly quiet about cultural heritage. A sacred area just upstream of the existing bridge was found back in 2017. Indigenous elders were concerned about its proximity to the road, and adamant it must not be damaged by construction.
DCS March 2022:
Council continues to negotiate with Jabalbina Yalanji Aboriginal Corporation to resolve outstanding issues. Finalisation is anticipated within weeks;
Due to the issues raised above it is considered unlikely that construction will occur in 2022, though Council officers continue to review possible opportunities that may become available;
Now well into 2023 and the best information we have had from DSC was in March via the Capital Works report which said:
Way forward agreed – Awaiting CHMP minimum 9 month process potential delays in Cultural Agreement – No Construction in 2023
So, from 2019 to 2023…no movement.
Now, four years later this bridge process has all the hallmarks of the Daintree Ferry disaster.
Council staff knew of the sacred area way back in 2017.
So, why in 2023 are they still trying to build a bridge on top of a special place? DSC purportedly supports the 'yes' vote in the upcoming referendum, but can’t build a simple bridge without disturbing sacred ground and potentially costing us millions in the process?
Will we lose another 4.5 million? If Council staff are incapable of getting a bridge built in a timely manner, there must surely be consequences?
By the time it gets built, it will be a relic, a bit like Noah’s Ark.
Thank you!
Newsport thanks its advertising partners for their support in the delivery of daily community news to the Douglas Shire. Public interest journalism is a fundamental part of every community.
Got a news tip? Let us know! Send your news tips or submit a letter to the editor here.
* Comments are the opinions of readers and do not represent the views of Newsport, its staff or affiliates. Reader comments on Newsport are moderated before publication to promote valuable, civil, and healthy community debate. Visit our comment guidelines if your comment has not been approved for publication.