777driver

Comment history

selfdestruction

so... howz that 'roach motel' fitting you in the darkness of the new light of the f.b. format.... not willing to come out into the light? Paul... sad,... and pity... that's what I feel for you.

June 2, 2011 at 1:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Now is not the time for a new bridge

So... less than the cost of the Afghanistan war for one day... we could have one renovated bridge and two "new" bridges???? And I'm a conservative.

May 31, 2011 at 5:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Now is not the time for a new bridge

now that!!!!... is something more than just "chump-change!".... 50 million. to take out the old and in with the new... when it could be ... just "in with the new!"

I'm nobody.... if I can think of this why can't they?

May 31, 2011 at 4:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Now is not the time for a new bridge

If I were King.... I would make the old bridge into light rail/ped/bike traffic. Could have saved the cost of the one now and put it toward a new bridge.

Don't tear down a perfectly good bridge. The cost of removal is ????? (help me out here folks/fellow engineers).... and put a new one next to it with all the road traffic. Upper/lower deck?... and put another bridge at 192nd with bike/ped traffic for the approx cost of $800 million?..... this is not rocket science folks. Logic has a say in it too... right?... oops... forgot, it's a 'dream vision' of many in the area.. not a functionality need.

May 31, 2011 at 3:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Now is not the time for a new bridge

.... and Mr. Burkman and I did this for free. No cost over runs, no "quid pro quo"...(don't even know Mr. Burkman).

$0.... who likes 'free' decision making?

I do.

May 31, 2011 at 9:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Now is not the time for a new bridge

A very good point Mr. Burkman. Now lets toll the two bridges for say two years to a "drop dead" date and get them both built. Alas, without the artificial sunshine option? (It's only 30 megawatts... or a mere 10% of Bonneville?)

Done!... on to the next issue. Much like the "if the firemen" ran the world.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...

May 31, 2011 at 9:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Now is not the time for a new bridge

I know... we can have a bridge that has artificial sunshine the entire span so people won't really think that the PacNW is all rain and clouds and... wait,.... it is all rain and clouds? June 1st and what is the forecast.... "rain and clouds"??? hmmmm... (wouldn't cost much, right?) (30 megawatt gen. station to support it, and, ... the good news... "We can toll it!!!).

May 31, 2011 at 9:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Now is not the time for a new bridge

I'm sure whatever is decided on will be a wonderful cost over-run, will have nothing anyone wanted and then will be a great parking lot for those who traverse the Delta Park area.... most will opt to go I-205.

Practically speaking ... we don't need one bridge... we need two. One to replace and a new one at 192nd or further up stream.

We get so wrapped around the axel on beauty of a "thing" when it's pragmatic to say in today's fiscal environment "What will work"... we don't have the money for the "Polyannic" view of a bridge. Can't afford light-rail,... can't afford cable-stay, can't afford "vision and beauty". We just need a bridge (I mean... two bridges).

Another, "let the Federal Gov't take care of it" approach and we will toll it to death to pay for our vision.

May 31, 2011 at 8:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

hargen

good post Hargen

May 29, 2011 at 5:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Allen

You are so right on this one.

May 29, 2011 at 5:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Previous