New Harbour Bridge completion date pushed back; high quality, safety assured

Last Updated on Thursday, 19 September 2024, 10:48 by Denis Chabrol

A view of the western section of the new four-lane high span bridge across the Demerara Harbour Bridge.

The new four-lane high-span Demerara Harbour Bridge is now set to be completed by March 31, 2025 due to international shipment delays, officials said Thursday.

Public Works Minister, Juan Edghill told an on-site news briefing that the bridge is almost 70 percent finished but would not meet the December 31, 2024 deadline. “We’re almost 70 percent complete. We had hoped that we would have been ahead but we had to give way because of some delays particularly as it relates to shipping in the midst of all that was happening around the world, the Panama Canal and the rest of it,” he said.  A prolonged drought had resulted in insufficient water to facilitate the timely movement of huge cargo ships with heavy cargo through the canal.

(Left to right) China Railway Structural Engineer Ganesh Persaud; a representative of China Railway; Politecnica’s Project Quality Management Country Supervisor, Vittorio Nascetti; Politecnica’s acting Team Leader Tritan Verteniku, Public Works Ministry’s Project Manager, Patrick Thompson, and Minister of Public Works, Juan Edghill.

Though the inked contract stipulates a project completion of December 31, 2024, Mr Edghill said the “revised date” for completion is March 31, 2o25. “From all indications, we will make that date,” he said. He said there would not be an increase in the construction cost. Public Works Ministry Project Manager for the bridge, Patrick Thompson said so far US$150 million of the budgeted US$260 million for the project.

Specifically, the China Railway Structural Engineer Ganesh Persaud said that as of Wednesday, September 2024, the bridge was 67.8 percent completed which includes the driving of 495 of the 658 piles. That includes the construction of 39 metres of the 112 metre tower legs, 50 percent of the east and west approach piers, and 100 percent completion of the east and west retaining walls. No work has so far been done on the main and side spans, and the tie beam/main tower cross beam is 12 percent.

Mr Thompson sought to assure that the bridge, being built by China Railway Construction (International) Limited at cost of US$260 million, would not sink or lean under heavy weight from vehicles when it becomes operable. He said the bridge was being built to specifications to withstand an earthquake.

Mr Thompson said safety measures to minimise the chance of vessels colliding with the structure includes a wide area across the channel, protective  collision system a short distance from the bridge and the structure itself being able with withstand the impact from Handymax vessels (which have a dead weight of 35,000 to 50,000 tonnes). “We have also built the structure of the foundation and the piers for the main tower to resist the collision of Handymax vessel so if it does collide, the structure is strong enough to not collapse or to not be impacted in any big way,” he said.

He explained that the bridge provides a height clearance of 50 metres to facilitate vessels with 48 metres, and 300 metres width for 150 metre safe passage.  “All those are elements to minimise any collision as they transit the bridge,” he said.

In terms of corrosion, he said the majority of the bridge is concrete and the coated steel cables would have to undergo periodic maintenance and replaced once every 30 years.

Mr Edghill said the Project Manager and his team had gone to China to “inspect and test the components and materials” before they left that Asian nation for Guyana. The supervisory contractor, Politecnica  from Italy, had also conducted  geotechnical tests at a certified United States laboratory, a Politecnica official said.

The Public Works Minister said legal squabbles over compensation to the decades-long occupants would not impact on the project because all of the land is already vested in the State. Five of the 50 property owners are yet to have their compensation settled based on government valuation for fair market value. Mr Edghill said the High Court has ruled that the owners should be awarded lower than the government’s offers.