Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge HIGH over the Cooper River in Charleston, SC. A gorgeous structure....
Posted on 03/31/2008 7:56:56 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
If the British and French can design and build spectacular bridges at a modest or at least reasonable cost, why can’t we? Or maybe we can, but we haven’t tried it lately, at least not in Oregon.
The question comes up because Peter DeFazio, our man in Washington, is chairman of the highways and transit subcommittee in the U.S. House. His committee will write the next highway bill, probably by the end of 2009. And when DeFazio led his colleagues on a fact-finding trip to Europe, he saw the viaduct at Millau.
It’s the most spectacular bridge he has ever seen. At about 2.5 kilometers long, it spans the Tarn valley in the Central Massif, carrying the main road from Paris to the south of France and Barcelona, the A75.
In the summer, when most of the people in Paris sensibly take about a month off, the road to the south used to have terrible traffic jams near the small town of Millau, where some roads come together.
To solve the congestion, The road authorities decided to bridge the valley, from one plateau to the other. They got a celebrated British architect to design the thing. What he designed looks like something out of a dream, hugely tall but so slender as to appear ephemeral.
The tallest of the seven steel and concrete pillars reaches nearly 1,000 feet into the clouds from the valley below. The four-lane deck — two lanes each way — hangs from a series of cable stays, making it the largest cable-stayed bridge in Europe.
More important from the standpoint of highway planners, DeFazio says the bridge was built in three years at a cost of about $700 million.
A report available online says the cost was 400 million euros, which at the time of construction (December 2001 through December 2004) would have been even less than the figure DeFazio was given.
The cost was modest when you consider what we are paying for routine freeway bridges. And it was cheap compared to the astronomical estimate —$4.2 billion — for a new bridge across the Columbia River in Portland.
The viaduct is designed to reassure drivers, who are charged a toll of about $5.60 for a trip across. It is slightly curved to keep drivers from feeling they are floating off into the sky.
A beautiful structure, useful and quickly built at a reasonable cost — let’s see if the highway subcommittee chairman can encourage such a thing here.
How do they get to our shores? Do camels dogpaddle?
If we had a hardcore border policy and weed out muslims and all other people actually the problem would be solved.
That “extra trillion” wouldn’t be spent on infrastructure. It would be spent on yet more pork, in a continued attempt by Congress to use our money to buy our votes. I know it and you know it.
I never said the WOT was stupid a**-just the one in Iraq.
PS I don't like muslims I would deport the vast majority of them and shut down their hate filled churches in this country.
Sharia Law? I'm a practicing catholic and I believe that muslims have a "misguided" religion.
What a beautiful bridge. Absolutely stunning. Can we get one built in Detroit?
The last time I checked highway project can be classified as pork. Remember the million dollar bridge in AK that went no where?
Ansar al Islam. Do some reading, you'll be amazed at what you find. Our war is with Islam. Everywhere. Even in Iraq.
Then why are we not attacking Egypt, Jordan, Dubai, Saudi Arabia etc etc etc?
You don’t have to defeat everyone all at once. Usually making an example of one brings the others into line. If that doesn’t work, then we work on Iran, and so on down the list. This is elementary stuff, and you either don’t get it or don’t want to get it.
You are a loon. Thank God you are not in charge of foreign policy. So you are going to take on the entire Islamic world huh? Take em on like dominoes. LOL 1000 year war.
Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge HIGH over the Cooper River in Charleston, SC. A gorgeous structure....
Either we defeat them or they will subjugate us. THEY are leaving us with no other choice. I suppose ignorance is bliss. Enjoy.
One reason that the United States became the worlds preeminent power is that our infrastructure (railroads, bridges, highways, etc.) facilitated our commercial and industrial growth. Would you argue that facilities like the Golden Gate or Verrezano bridges were "white elephants"? Or for that matter, the Hoover Dam, the California aqueduct system, or O'Hare Airport?
Could an American consortium build a tower taller than the Taipei 101 or the Petronas Towers in Chicago? Of course. But there is no commercial demand for such a structure.
You may be correct from a market viewpoint. IIRC, Frank Lloyd Wright designed a skyscraper that would have been over one mile high many decades ago, but it was unfeasible from a financial standpoint. However, the question must be asked if environmental regulations and land use and zoning laws in place would preclude it from a political standpoint, as well as a financial one.
The closest point between Connecticut and Long Island is probably the stretch of sound between Port Chester and Bayview (near Syosset). That's about eight miles over a stretch of water with midpoint islands - completely impractical when you have the Whitestone bridge 15 miles down the road from Port Chester.
Why would you build a tunnel from Bayonne to Red Hook, when you have the Verrazano?
The facilities you describe are decades old and are used at capacities far higher than the builders anticipated. They may be well built and thus safe with proper maintenance, but the traffic congestion caused by the failure to supplement these facilities with new spans adversely impacts the economy of New York City and Long Island and may add to air pollution problems as well.
The investigation shows that the bridge collapsed due to a contractor's error when it was first built - not to poor maintenance.
True enough, but had there been more frequent inspections, the problem may well have been detected before tragedy ensued.
Ridiculous. In the actual Third World - like the Malaysia of the Petronas Towers of which you stand in such awe - once you get outside of the capital and the amin artery to the port, you're on dirt roads.
False. Nations like China, Mexico, and India have been busy upgrading their infrastructure. Mexico has added several thousand miles of toll roads and divided highways in the last few years. What you describe is far more characteristic of sub-Saharan Africa and the former Soviet Union than East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Latin America.
Historically, a major portion of the transportation infrastructure has been the jurisdiction of governments. The fact is that over the past 30-35 years. Federal, state, and local governments have failed to keep up with growth in population and usage. This needs to change.
All right, I'll ask. What's your beef with HOV lanes (when used to reduce traffic density, as originally intended)?
That would knock a lot of time off a trip from Cedar Point to Canada's Wonderland.....
We use them here in Colorado and while I might argue with the actual implementation of the HOV lane, they do provide a valuable resource.
They allow a portion of the traffic - namely emergency services, to be able to use infrastructure without being impeded by traffic. In an area where the HOV lanes exist, of an accident occurs jamming up the freeway, ambulances, police, fire and tow trucks can all still get to the scene in short order. This more rapidly restores the flow of traffic. The added boon is that the space allocated to the HOV lane is not lost. It is used also to offload some of the traffic via buses OR additional toll via transponder for those that wish to pay extra to bypass the traffic.
Granted, this does not work everywhere or for everyone, but there is a benefit that some like to have on their roadways.
Most HOV lanes I've seen use up 4-lanes worth of land (two lanes, plus dividers and shoulders) for every 2 lanes worth of very-light-density traffic they accommodate. In return, the original lanes' traffic density experiences a very slight drop when HOV is introduced, but continues to grow at the same rate. It doesn't seem to be any better for traffic density than just adding 4 lanes, or using the HOV as free "express" lane that alternates direction based on AM/PM traffic patterns.
Yep............i cross it twice a day.....
If we need more capacity and less traffic, why not just widen the road and then ensure quick traffic flow by congestion-pricing all the lanes.
And the congestion pricing can be used to pay back the costs of construction.
The French don’t have to complete environmental damage estimates and hold thousands of hearings.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.