I-5 Bridge Replacement: How did we get here?

No video

I-5 Bridge Replacement: How did we get here?

Рет қаралды 4,547

KGW News

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 14

@garbagemanbear406 2 ай бұрын

The Oregon planners need to look at how San Francisco and Oakland replaced the eastern span of the bay bridge due to earthquake concerns and see how the new bridge played out

@povertyspec9651 2 жыл бұрын

What a joke. Paying a toll to drive on a bridge that will still be congested because it will not have enough lanes.

@bradenmcintire6984 Жыл бұрын

Adding more lanes doesn't solve congestion

@Insertgenericusernamehere809 4 ай бұрын

Being a drawbridge and having no shoulders. Could understand the 1917 bridge being a drawbridge becuse it pre dates interstates and even US highways, but the 1958 bridge SHOULD NOT have been a drawbridge. They did a good job screwing up on that one.

@BlazingShackles Жыл бұрын

Washington state senate realized they literally could not write enough traffic tickets to cover the cost. Its time Wa grows up and implements an income tax. Oh, and Oregon, youre gonna have to have a sales tax too.

@fogdelm 2 жыл бұрын

This should have been done in the 80's.. typical government overthinking. Should blow up old brigde.bridge.. build new one 4 lanes each way.. no light rail.. draw section in middle. Done

@bradenmcintire6984 Жыл бұрын

You think one more lane each way is gonna solve traffic? Nope, it won't. Viable transit is the only way traffic will improve. The light rail is necessary

@daeone1514 Жыл бұрын

They threw that bridge together huh?? When i5 freeway was built, they knew that bridge was gonna be in the way and instead of them actually rebuilding the entire thing for freeway code, they just built another drawbridge next to it, with smaller counterweights, and the humpty Dumpty hump. The bridge looks like 2 giant 🐌😂

@Insertgenericusernamehere809 5 ай бұрын

Exactly. No shoulders, poor piling design, and being a drawbridge. At the bare minimum, could they have at least made the 2nd span a fixed span? No. The first span didn’t need too becuse it was only up to US highway standards, but by the 2nd span all of these were just archaic design choices.

@BernardS4 2 жыл бұрын

The new crossing should still be a tunnel. Is it because economic interests have insisted that an intersection on the island not really needed for light demographics must be included. More than enough access to the island is provided by the harbor bridge.