I absolutely agree that we have not adequately maintained our infrastructure in the U.S. -- especially those states that aren't earthquake prone. (Earthquakes are a wonderful reminder to rebuild and replace).
But I have a big fear here. Transportation projects (particularly roads) become boondoggles. They escalate in price and scope like nobody's business. There isn't a paper in the U.S. that isn't now listing all the bridges that need to be fixed. Many of them interstate bridges. There will be a call for billions of dollars of new highway funds to replace these bridges. And I can see the issue now: well as long as we are replacing that bridge, we thought we'd go ahead and widen that road through there as well. So we can save money later. Costs and scope will explode and money will be pulled away from transit and other needed projects. I just know it will.
Perhaps this will die down and I'm just overreacting, but unless something is done to talk about limiting scope of replacement and costs: this could be a really stupid situation.
it is very interesting to see the bridge next to the collapsed bridge- it is obviously a much older- and more "classical" design.Much of the construction done in the 1950- 80 era was shoddy and cheap.The older bridge- which obviously utilized high-end craftspeople and skilled workers- looks like it could take a direct hit from a nuke and still stand and be useful once the rads wear out...Goes to show you that all of this fancy F.L.Wrong inspired Broadacre City stuff is made quickly and cannot stand the test of time.Falling Waters- it is said by some- is falling down [ F.L.Wrong used inferior concrete and it has forced the custodians of this trashy building to spend millions to rebuild it].
Good points both. Re: the latter, I was thinking exactly that. An illustration of the "built to last" orientation of craftsmanship as opposed to constructing a product.
I shot a photo, haven't uploaded it yet, of a small contractor's truck with his slogan: "We build things."
I thought, "Exactly." It's a thing, not a house, it's a product not a place.
A couple things about the comparisons of the bridges.
1. The many bridges that were built in the 1950s and 1960s were not built to last -- there was a huge steel shortage because of the Korean War. This caused a lot short cuts to be taken.
2. I imagine that the automobile traffic on I-35W was a lot heavier (and probably way heavier than anticipated -- like our own Woodrow Wilson bridge0 and so it's not really an apples to apples comparison.
3. Design wise the bridges were very similar. Althougth the 10th street bridge is reinforced concrete. The steel bridge of the I-35W was arched in a similar way. It had the look and feel of a classic bridge industrial steel bridge, like the San Francisco Bay Bridge. It wasn't a typical "highway" bridge. although it probably would have been replaced by something like other I-35W bridges in Minneapolis (basically a highway on stilts).
Interesting tidbit: I've been witness to a conversation about the steel in that bridge. A friend of my father's is an editor at the Des Moines Register. Another friend from the same group of guys -- that all grew up together -- is a civil engineering professor at Virginia Tech. The steel for the bridge came from a now closed steel factory in Des Moines. The civil engineer worked on the design of that bridge during his first job out of school. He also confirms that it was a classic design not a like a highway viaduct at all.
Interesting notes on the Civil Engineering of the I-35W bridge are here: http://www.visi.com/~jweeks/brid...pages/
ms16.html
the truth is palin to see- the older, better looking, and more classical -looking bridge is still standing.That is the test here.
Commenting by HaloScan
