Whatis the latest on rebuilding the bridge? (St. Paul, South St. Paul: appointed, construction)

[sfw1979]

what is the latest? We were in MN when it happened visiting family. Have not heard anything since? How long will it take to rebuild?

[Minnehahapolitan]

The river is back open to at least barge traffic. The contractor they chose (the ones who rebuilt I10 in Pensacola) estimated 400 days or so. I haven't seen a design, but expect to be disappointed.

[sfw1979]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

The river is back open to at least barge traffic. The contractor they chose (the ones who rebuilt I10 in Pensacola) estimated 400 days or so. I haven't seen a design, but expect to be disappointed.

400 days doesn't seem so bad. When are they going to start?

[wildtymez]

I know they need to respect those lost in the incident. But everday that bridge is gone is making for worse traffic conditions. It is a very vital road to this area. Last I hear they are projecting to have the new bridge completed by Autumn 2008. I believe there is a dispute going on right now about putting light rail on the bridge.

[Minnehahapolitan]

It is killing the local businesses. Even The Quarry is dead. There was an article about it in City Pages if anyone wants to dig it up. Anyways, the funding for reconstruction was promised by Washington. Instead of creating a bill that would unianoumously be passed, they tacked it onto a bill that Pres. Bush promises to veto. So it is 400 days from when they start, which will be longer than necessary. The state is preparing to make a list of other projects to cut back if Washington doesn't cough it up by mid-October. Bastards.

[golfgal]

The Star-Tribune is reporting this morning that the Wakota Bridge in South St. Paul could be delayed, AGAIN, to free up funding for 35W bridge. That project has been ongoing for what seems like a decade--what has it been 4 years?

[Delaneyland]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

It is killing the local businesses. Even The Quarry is dead. There was an article about it in City Pages if anyone wants to dig it up. Anyways, the funding for reconstruction was promised by Washington. Instead of creating a bill that would unianoumously be passed, they tacked it onto a bill that Pres. Bush promises to veto. So it is 400 days from when they start, which will be longer than necessary. The state is preparing to make a list of other projects to cut back if Washington doesn't cough it up by mid-October. Bastards.

When you say "they", I think its only fair to point out exactly who "they" is. Last I heard, it was Jim Oberstar that was doing the stumping for light rail.

[AVguy]

Originally Posted by Delaneyland

When you say "they", I think its only fair to point out exactly who "they" is. Last I heard, it was Jim Oberstar that was doing the stumping for light rail.

Are we really going to go here? I guess that I'll indulge. The pools of money for highways/bridges and transit come from different funds. You're basically implying that money spent on the light rail is getting taken from the bridges. That's like me saying, "If we stopped funding the war in Iraq, we'd have more money for the 35W bridge." This logic doesn't apply because military funding is separately allocated from highway and bridge funding, meaning that there is no guarantee that money not spent on the military would magically get earmarked toward the 35W bridge. Same with transit--if transit money doesn't go toward Hiawatha, it either goes to Denver or Seattle's transit systems or, even more unlikely, gets put back into the general fund.

[punkerdunker]

The dispute over Light Rail capability was settled a while back - the new bridge WILL be designed in such a way that it can accomodate the addition of LRT in the future. To NOT do so would have been short-sighted IMO.

The new drama regards the bidding process that resulted in the winning contract. The winning bid was the highest of the 4 proposals, by about 57 million dollars, and also tied for the longest time-table. The losers are now appealing the decision and demanding an investigation, and of course many taxpayers are complaing about "wasteful spending". As I understand it, the winning design got a technical score of about 98 out of 100, whereas the three others got technical scores in the 50 to 60 range. That suggests to me that the bridge design that won is much less likely to collapse again than the competing designs. Of course I don't know the details, but MnDOT seems to have its' priorities straight, and perhaps people should just accept that sometimes the cheaper option isn't necessarily a good idea. Anyone who buys lumber at Menards knows what I'm talking about. In light of what happened to the 35 bridge, maybe this not the right project to complain about spending extra taxpayer dollars, at least until all the information is made public.

[Minnehahapolitan]

Thank you AVGuy. Oberstar is God's gift to transportation, he brings millions into this state as he leads that committee in Washington. The availibility of light rail on the bridge is a simple design consideration, it took little extra time or money. "They", for your knowledge, is the resresentative(s) who was/were lazy enough that they failed to write a simple bill. Accusing Oberstar of that is just plain ignorant.