If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Quad City Times)   "Well, we can't give the $72 million it would take to build a new bridge because the old one is unsafe. But we can spend $10 million to paint the old one and make it look prettier"   (qctimes.com) divider line 39
    More: Fail, Iowa Department of Transportation, Quad Cities, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood  
•       •       •

5509 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 May 2012 at 12:32 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



39 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-05-16 10:20:00 AM
Oh look, its a troll headline.
 
2012-05-16 10:24:46 AM

Somacandra: Oh look, its a troll headline.


I get it. Bridge, troll. Clever.
 
2012-05-16 10:45:23 AM
FFS subby, did you even read the article?
 
2012-05-16 12:24:40 PM
KEN IS BEHIND THIS!
 
2012-05-16 12:34:34 PM
I hope it's weight-bearing paint
 
2012-05-16 12:38:36 PM
Too bad fixing our "was best in the world" crumbling infrastructure is socialism.

I like passable roads and safe bridges. I will miss them.
 
2012-05-16 12:39:03 PM
Multi-state projects like this one are always a PITA for everyone, especially when they involve tens of millions of dollars. Subby is full of shiat though with that title; "functionally obsolete" does not mean "unsafe". It means the bridge is old and inadequate to handle the traffic it is currently carrying.

Like the Boobies said, troll headline.
 
2012-05-16 12:41:10 PM
If only there was some way to hire workers to build more bridges and roads. If only.
 
2012-05-16 12:41:23 PM

Bendal: Multi-state projects like this one are always a PITA for everyone, especially when they involve tens of millions of dollars. Subby is full of shiat though with that title; "functionally obsolete" does not mean "unsafe". It means the bridge is old and inadequate to handle the traffic it is currently carrying.

Like the Boobies said, troll headline.


Reading comprehension much?

"Last week, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood was in the Quad-Cities to examine the bridge while meeting with officials to discuss its replacement. LaHood's assessment was harsh. He called it "one of the worst bridges I've ever seen" of the nearly 300 he says are on a list of spans in need of replacement or major repair."
 
2012-05-16 12:41:24 PM
Transportation officials say the bridge is safe to drive on, but they say it is "functionally obsolete."
 
2012-05-16 12:42:37 PM
Letting the work of our forebears crumble into oblivion is a conservative family value, so just go pray about it.
 
2012-05-16 12:42:41 PM
Apparently the bridge is safe but its inadequate (needs more lanes, needs more frequent repairs, etc). $10 million is to paint it so that it won't rust so that it can last another 15 years till its replacement can be built. $72 million isn't the cost of replacement, just the amount of money currently being put aside for replacement.
 
2012-05-16 12:42:46 PM

Bendal: Multi-state projects like this one are always a PITA for everyone, especially when they involve tens of millions of dollars. Subby is full of shiat though with that title; "functionally obsolete" does not mean "unsafe". It means the bridge is old and inadequate to handle the traffic it is currently carrying.

Like the Boobies said, troll headline.


Does this meant he load is higher than the design specs or that the volume of traffic attempting to cross it forces delays?

/one is unsafe
//the other is just annoying
 
2012-05-16 12:42:51 PM
Actually, the headline isn't that much of a troll. I'm from the area where this bridge is (Rock Island) and they've been farking around for ~20 years trying to replace it. Every few years a local politician will issue a press release about how the project is finally "shovel ready" but all we need is one more environmental impact study or traffic study or impact on local business study or this consultation study or that engineering report or what-the-fark-ever and the goddamned thing never gets replaced.

It's a crumbling, narrow piece of shiat and nothing is ever done about it other than they paint it once every couple of years and keep talking about replacing it.

images4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-05-16 12:44:37 PM
Aww, I really like that bridge. They're probably replace it with yet another of those boring precast concrete pieces of crap. God forbid there to be anything neat to look at when driving on the interstate.
 
2012-05-16 12:45:21 PM
Why are so many people so adamant to point out 'safe'?

The inspector, you know the guy who went to school and stuff, said it was one of the worst he has seen.

Transportation Officials, you know appointed or elected guys, say its safe.

Who do you believe?

/Happy motoring!
 
2012-05-16 12:49:23 PM

nutkick_42: Aww, I really like that bridge. They're probably replace it with yet another of those boring precast concrete pieces of crap. God forbid there to be anything neat to look at when driving on the interstate.


So, it's more important that they look good than be safe?

\Priorities...yours are...questionable.
 
2012-05-16 12:53:09 PM

inelegy: Actually, the headline isn't that much of a troll. I'm from the area where this bridge is (Rock Island) and they've been farking around for ~20 years trying to replace it. Every few years a local politician will issue a press release about how the project is finally "shovel ready" but all we need is one more environmental impact study or traffic study or impact on local business study or this consultation study or that engineering report or what-the-fark-ever and the goddamned thing never gets replaced.

It's a crumbling, narrow piece of shiat and nothing is ever done about it other than they paint it once every couple of years and keep talking about replacing it.



THIS.

/quad-citian
 
2012-05-16 12:55:32 PM

Corporate Self: Bendal: Multi-state projects like this one are always a PITA for everyone, especially when they involve tens of millions of dollars. Subby is full of shiat though with that title; "functionally obsolete" does not mean "unsafe". It means the bridge is old and inadequate to handle the traffic it is currently carrying.

Like the Boobies said, troll headline.

Reading comprehension much?


Why yes, I RTFA, and saw the comment you mentioned. Nowhere did anyone say the bridge was "unsafe", only that it was in bad shape and in need of repair. Perhaps you need to look up the definition of "unsafe". As TFA pointed out, the bridge is "functionally obsolete", which does not mean "about to fall apart".

/highway design engineer
//not in Iowa
///replaced plenty of "functionally obsolete" bridges
 
X15
2012-05-16 12:58:16 PM

Corporate Self: Why are so many people so adamant to point out 'safe'?

The inspector, you know the guy who went to school and stuff, said it was one of the worst he has seen.

Transportation Officials, you know appointed or elected guys, say its safe.

Who do you believe?

/Happy motoring!


The Secretary of Transportation, an appointed official who's not a bridge inspector, said it was the worst he's ever seen.

A functionally obsolete bridge can be unsafe for the volume of traffic it gets, but that does NOT mean that it's about to collapse.
 
2012-05-16 01:01:04 PM
And then it collapses and much finger-banging will be enjoyed.
 
2012-05-16 01:02:07 PM
Just like to point out that you paint steel bridges to protect the steel from further salt water vapor damage and corrosion. Its not just to make it "prettier", the paint has a function in protecting and sealing the steel from degrading.
 
2012-05-16 01:02:32 PM

Bendal: Like the Boobies said, troll headline.


That's funny. Whenever I hear them, they always say, "Squeeze me."
 
2012-05-16 01:05:35 PM
As a person who has driven across that bridge, structurally sound or not it is farking scary in a larger vehicle.
 
2012-05-16 01:07:56 PM
I just want to point out that it's Tarpon Springs, not Tarpon.
 
2012-05-16 01:09:10 PM
We MUST repaint our nation's crumbling infrastructure.


Link
 
2012-05-16 01:12:34 PM
Why the hell did they hire a Florida company to work on the bridge? Do they get a lot of winter road salt down in Florida? OK, so just because the company is based in Florida doesn't mean no one working for them knows about road salt and how to defend against it, just though it was odd that you'd hire a company from somewhere they don't use road salt to defend against damage that road salt can do to a bridge.
 
2012-05-16 01:51:42 PM
I'm gonna let you guys in on something. It doesn't cost 10,100,000.00 to paint a bridge, not even a huge one. Not in materials, labor, profit, equipment. Nope. It does not.
 
2012-05-16 01:57:11 PM

bunner: I'm gonna let you guys in on something. It doesn't cost 10,100,000.00 to paint a bridge, not even a huge one. Not in materials, labor, profit, equipment. Nope. It does not.


It's compensation for dealing with the Illinois drivers

/hellooooo
 
2012-05-16 02:01:44 PM

nutkick_42: Aww, I really like that bridge. They're probably replace it with yet another of those boring precast concrete pieces of crap. God forbid there to be anything neat to look at when driving on the interstate.


Well, pretty bridges usually cost more than simple, functional ones. Are you willing to have your taxes increased to pay for a pretty bridge over a simple functional one?
 
2012-05-16 02:18:38 PM

bunner: I'm gonna let you guys in on something. It doesn't cost 10,100,000.00 to paint a bridge, not even a huge one. Not in materials, labor, profit, equipment. Nope. It does not.


Do you know how much it costs to bribe a politicians to get a contract these days?

Jeez
 
2012-05-16 02:18:39 PM
The 74 bridge desperately needs replacing, but as other have pointed on in this thread it keeps not happening, and instead we get "painting" or "cleaning" every other year. They "cleaned" it less than 2 years ago, which consisted of backing up traffic for a mile and a half 6-8 hours a day for 6 months and left the bridge looking exactly the same, right down to the rust streaks. And to make matters worse, any time there are lane closures on it, the other two QC bridges (one of which is a military bridge that has a drawspan which may/may not be open) get completely clogged, rendering the downtown areas even more unnavigable than usual.

We need a new Mississippi bridge. Instead, Illinois built a huge-ass multi-bazillion dollar bridge across the Rock river that screwed up the entire eastern QC traffic flow and goes to a place that already had 2 bridges leading to it and that no sane person would want to visit anyway. Yes, Milan, I'm talking about you.

/rant
 
2012-05-16 02:26:30 PM

fatimcgee: nutkick_42: Aww, I really like that bridge. They're probably replace it with yet another of those boring precast concrete pieces of crap. God forbid there to be anything neat to look at when driving on the interstate.

So, it's more important that they look good than be safe?

\Priorities...yours are...questionable.


Hint: Functional and neat looking are not mutually exclusive

Geotpf: nutkick_42: Aww, I really like that bridge. They're probably replace it with yet another of those boring precast concrete pieces of crap. God forbid there to be anything neat to look at when driving on the interstate.

Well, pretty bridges usually cost more than simple, functional ones. Are you willing to have your taxes increased to pay for a pretty bridge over a simple functional one?


Creative designs don't always have to cost more, but yes I am.
 
2012-05-16 02:30:27 PM
"Functionally obsolete" can include a bridge which does not meet current standards, i.e. an Interstate bridge which does not have a center median or shoulders wide enough.

This means that the Mackinac Bridge (I-75, one of the best maintained bridges in Michigan, if not the nation) is functionally obsolete.

/and the 74 bridges just suck
 
2012-05-16 02:58:42 PM
That's OK. They're using structural paint.
 
2012-05-16 04:01:52 PM

blackhalo: inelegy: Actually, the headline isn't that much of a troll. I'm from the area where this bridge is (Rock Island) and they've been farking around for ~20 years trying to replace it. Every few years a local politician will issue a press release about how the project is finally "shovel ready" but all we need is one more environmental impact study or traffic study or impact on local business study or this consultation study or that engineering report or what-the-fark-ever and the goddamned thing never gets replaced.

It's a crumbling, narrow piece of shiat and nothing is ever done about it other than they paint it once every couple of years and keep talking about replacing it.



THIS.

/quad-citian


As I was traveling across the bridge this morning, the woman in front of me slammed her brakes. I'm assuming it was because she got freaked out by the crew climbing on the westbound side of the bridge.
 
2012-05-16 04:30:56 PM

verteiron: The 74 bridge desperately needs replacing, but as other have pointed on in this thread it keeps not happening, and instead we get "painting" or "cleaning" every other year. They "cleaned" it less than 2 years ago, which consisted of backing up traffic for a mile and a half 6-8 hours a day for 6 months and left the bridge looking exactly the same, right down to the rust streaks. And to make matters worse, any time there are lane closures on it, the other two QC bridges (one of which is a military bridge that has a drawspan which may/may not be open) get completely clogged, rendering the downtown areas even more unnavigable than usual.

We need a new Mississippi bridge. Instead, Illinois built a huge-ass multi-bazillion dollar bridge across the Rock river that screwed up the entire eastern QC traffic flow and goes to a place that already had 2 bridges leading to it and that no sane person would want to visit anyway. Yes, Milan, I'm talking about you.

/rant


TBF, Illinois is having to build a LOT of bridges right now. There's at least two being built around St. Louis, the new Chain of Rocks carrying I-270 and the new downtown I-70 bridge. I think they're also working on one down by Cairo over either the Ohio or Mississippi rivers, and there's talk of a new bridge at Louisiana, MO or Perryville, MO, depending on the federal funds.
 
2012-05-16 08:20:03 PM

nutkick_42: Aww, I really like that bridge. They're probably replace it with yet another of those boring precast concrete pieces of crap. God forbid there to be anything neat to look at when driving on the interstate.


Well, it looks like the original span was built in 1935, if the paint is supposed to last 15 years, perhaps that will be enough time for a historic designation so that they will have to repair it instead of replacing it.

It looks like it's already eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, hopefully this will be a heads up for the locals to get it on there. That should block federal funds for tearing it down, at least.
 
2012-05-17 01:58:34 AM

squirrelflavoredyogurt: Why the hell did they hire a Florida company to work on the bridge? Do they get a lot of winter road salt down in Florida? OK, so just because the company is based in Florida doesn't mean no one working for them knows about road salt and how to defend against it, just though it was odd that you'd hire a company from somewhere they don't use road salt to defend against damage that road salt can do to a bridge.


Possibly because the Florida based company is used to dealing with bridges surrounded by salt water year round.

We have a lot of bridges and salt water in Florida.
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report