M.D. OF BONNYVILLE – Two rural bridge projects are moving forward, but they’ll cost the M.D. of Bonnyville nearly half a million dollars more than originally budgeted.

Council approved an additional $ 495,024 from its bridge reserves during the October 13 meeting, following higher-than-expected construction bids for projects near Tucker Lake and on Township Road 622.

While both funding requests were approved, the rising costs sparked some discussion around the council table, including whether the M.D. should be spending more money on bridges that see relatively little traffic.

Tucker Lake bridge scaled back to save money

The first project involves replacing Bridge File 73061 on Range Road 450A near Tucker Lake.

The M.D. originally tendered the project in July 2025 as a two-lane bridge, but the lowest bid came in at $1.427 million, well above budget.

Administration went back to the drawing board, changing the project to a single-lane bridge with winter construction and allowing contractors to propose a design-build approach.

When the project was tendered again in September 2026, the lowest bid dropped to $ 1,140,140.

That’s nearly $ 287,000 less than the original bid, but still not enough to complete the project within the existing budget.

With engineering and contingency costs included, the total estimated project cost is now $ 1,399,954.

Council approved an additional $ 299,954 from the bridge reserve to cover the shortfall.

Second bridge has been closed for nearly a year

The second project involves rehabilitating Bridge File 75639 on Township Road 622, east of Range Road 484.

Unlike the Tucker Lake project, this bridge has already been closed for nearly a year after an abutment shifted and failed.

The closure has forced some residents and agricultural operators to take a longer route around the area.

The original lowest bid for the rehabilitation work came in at $ 1,097,020, exceeding the M.D.’s $ 900,000 budget.

Rather than accept the price, administration negotiated with the lowest bidder and managed to bring the construction cost down to $ 887,020, a reduction of $ 210,000.

The revised agreement includes extending the completion deadline from November 30 to April 15 and making a minor change to the bridge’s backwall design, which was approved by the consulting engineer.

Even with those savings, engineering and contingency costs bring the estimated project total to $ 1,095,722.

Council approved another $ 195,070 from the bridge reserve to keep the rehabilitation moving forward.

Councillors question rising costs

The additional funding didn’t come without concerns.

During discussion on the second bridge, a councillor questioned whether the M.D. should cancel the project and put the money toward a bridge with higher traffic volumes.

“These are pretty big overruns and asks,” the councillor said, suggesting there may be other bridges where the money could be better spent.

Councillor Dan Amalia acknowledged the frustration over rising costs but pointed out that even a bridge with relatively little traffic can be essential to the people who rely on it.

“For the people in that area, it is a very significant bridge,” Amalia said.

Deputy Reeve Ben Fadeyiw also cautioned against delaying the project, arguing that waiting another year could result in even higher construction costs.

“I think we just bumped this down the road later on, it’s just going to cost us more money again,” Fadeyiw said.

He also credited administration for negotiating a lower price rather than accepting the original tender.

Amalia ultimately moved to approve the additional funding for the Township Road 622 bridge, and council carried the motion.

Nearly $2.5 million in bridge work

Together, the two projects now have estimated budgets of approximately $ 2.5 million, with just under $ 500,000 of that coming from newly approved bridge reserve funding.

The Tucker Lake replacement accounts for approximately $1.4 million, while the Township Road 622 rehabilitation is estimated at nearly $1.1 million.

For council, the decision came down to balancing rising construction costs against the need to maintain rural infrastructure, particularly where a bridge closure can mean lengthy detours for residents and farmers.

Both projects now have the additional funding needed to proceed, although the approved budget adjustments do not, on their own, confirm construction completion dates.