[PRCo] Re: Speedy Gonzales

[Ken and Tracie]

In the case of the I-35W span, the necessity of the having the bridge 
replaced led to the various agencies allowing the builders to skip the usual 
steps required. The missing span was considered "crippling" to the regional 
economy.

The new bridge, by the way, is a visual delight. It is a beautiful 
structure.

One of my favorite examples of regulations gone mad was requiring an 
"environment study" before allowing Amtrak to set the poles for the 
electrification of the northern section of the Northeast Corridor. I wonder 
how much diesel exhaust and soot was kicked into the air between NYC and 
Boston during that study?

K.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Derrick J Brashear" <shadow at dementia.org>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:40 AM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Speedy Gonzales


> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Schneider Fred wrote:
>
>> The new bridge was opened July 23, 1920, 36 days later.
>>
>> If that happened in 2009, would we still be picking our noses 36 days
>> later wondering about the rules for bidding and buy American content
>> and affirmative action and and and and?
>
> Hey, uh, how long did California take to fix the Macarthur Maze ramp (I'd
> argue that's comparable)? How long did Minnesota take to replace the
> I-35W bridge (which is rather more complicated)
>
> This is a trick question. I know the answers, at least to order of
> magnitude.
>
>