Center truss drives up Hadley Overpass repair costs

So the original cost was $24.4 Mil -- Did it say what the NEW cost would be?

The head say an increased cost.

If it was in the story, I missed it.

With all of the work and time being spent on this bridge, why didn't they just put in a new bridge? I think it is the city's fault for not taking care of the bridge to begin with...

Walley for President wrote:

With all of the work and time being spent on this bridge, why didn't they just put in a new bridge? I think it is the city's fault for not taking care of the bridge to begin with...

It was seriously considered and evaluated ... it would have been cheaper to close the bridge, tear it down, and build a new one. But the railroad didn't like the idea of a crossing (liability) and businesses were concerned a bridge closing would kill them.

hard dude wrote:

So the original cost was $24.4 Mil -- Did it say what the NEW cost would be?
The head say an increased cost.
If it was in the story, I missed it.

It's state and federal money. Come on, Dude, get with the program. It's Monopoly money. They just make it up and print some more as they go along.

This is little ol' NA's own version of the Big Dig, after all. The sky's the limit. Just wait for the next 'stimulus' to come out of D.C.(from BOTH sides of the aisle, incidentally, lest this degenerate into yet another round of red/blue-he said/she said).

Let's see, the election is in November, so my guess is Daddy Warbucks Olver will come through with a nice big check some time in October.

A ballooning national debt that eventually will crush this country (Go, China!) is a small and trivial price to pay for making sure incumbents keep getting returned to D.C. and Boston every couple of years.

What is the new COST? I can't think of a less relevant question.:-)

Get real wrote:

<quoted text>
It's state and federal money. Come on, Dude, get with the program. It's Monopoly money. They just make it up and print some more as they go along.
This is little ol' NA's own version of the Big Dig, after all. The sky's the limit. Just wait for the next 'stimulus' to come out of D.C.(from BOTH sides of the aisle, incidentally, lest this degenerate into yet another round of red/blue-he said/she said).
Let's see, the election is in November, so my guess is Daddy Warbucks Olver will come through with a nice big check some time in October.
A ballooning national debt that eventually will crush this country (Go, China!) is a small and trivial price to pay for making sure incumbents keep getting returned to D.C. and Boston every couple of years.
What is the new COST? I can't think of a less relevant question.:-)

TEA PARTY !!

this whole project is a joke, cost wise and time wise
reminds us of cheny's haliburton
rip off the public

It's not a truss. It's call an I beam, critical member, structural I beam or the entire structure a pier, but it's not a truss...

To the previous commenters: are you upset because you will now be driving on a structurally sound bridge or because there is a bit traffic back up due to the work? 70% of the bridges in the country are structurally inadequate to some degree.

Quit complaining. If its the traffic you are upseet about, try driving in and around Chicago during morning or evening rush. Than you can complain.

You guys sound like typical, left wing whiners that represent the vast majority of the Berkshires...

To answer Wally. If an entirely new bridge were to be constructed the abutments and piers would have to be entirely removed to bring them up to the current code requirements for reinforced concrete used in this application. Take the current costs and double them...

Big Daddy wrote:

To the previous commenters: are you upset because you will now be driving on a structurally sound bridge or because there is a bit traffic back up due to the work? 70% of the bridges in the country are structurally inadequate to some degree.
Quit complaining. If its the traffic you are upseet about, try driving in and around Chicago during morning or evening rush. Than you can complain.
You guys sound like typical, left wing whiners that represent the vast majority of the Berkshires...

Sounds like SOMEBODY's dipping his snout in the public trough. lol

And no, tearing down the bridge and building something from scratch would not have cost double. We're all paying extra for the privilege of preserving the 'historic beauty' of what is, essentially, a place to go from point A to point B.

I don't mind spending public money. Hell, building roads is one of the few things that can only be funded by public money. What I find amusing is the way career politicians find to spend more money than needs to be spent.

That does not make me a Teabagger or a 'lib' or any other of your convenient labels. That makes me a realist.

"...Despite the need for an additional phase of construction, the bridge repairs shouldn’t go past the original completion date of June 2010..."

So I assume the project has been completed??

Get Real deposits:
What is the new COST? I can't think of a less relevant question.:-)">>> >>..........

Yeah, well how many presididents have there been since they first started talking about fixing that thing? And how long was that walk-way deemed unsafe and unuseable.

But The headline said there was an increase of cost, but i did not see how much more.

The Transcript: "HEY!!! Come Over Here And Look!!!"

What's there.

I ain't gonna tell ya.

Infrastucture is a good thing to spend tax money on. Sending about $500 BILLION to rebuild Afghanastan is sort of a waste of our hard earned wages.

So, if people want to talk about waste and being taxed too much -- hold off handing out billions to iranians, afgans, isreal, panama, mexico -- and all those other poor countries we want to buy.

So, those countries are poor --- so are a lot of people here!

Why doesn't the council approve fixing the street lights in town? How stupid and antiquated they are! REALLY, there are no GREEN ARROW on Main and Eagle street to turn left and on Route 2 in front of Dunkin Donuts. You get a green and have to pull out..... it says a lot about the city.

Why doesn't the council approve fixing the street lights in town? How stupid and antiquated they are! ">>>>>> >>>>>>...... ....

Thought I read new lights will be coming. Special made 'Period Lighting'--(which is to say fancy old timey lights to make down town real purdy.)

It sounds like it's a good thing they were working on it and found the deterioration! That bridge could have collapsed!! I agree, that maybe they should have replaced it. But I'm glad they found that flaw! Makes you wonder about other bridges in the area.

Completeion June 2010??? How about June 2011.

So! It would have been less costly to tear down the whole bridge and build a new one instead. But! Low and behold, the railroad would not hear of it because they didn't want a crossing liability. Also the business owners would lose money if the bridge was closed. Who is running this city? The railroad and business owners, or the mayor and city council? How come the taxpayers were not asked if they wanted to save money by tearing down the bridge and build a new one. Of course not.Because if they had a special election, the minority would not have gotten their way.But, a new bridge would already be running and the city would have benn a little richer, and the business owners would have normal traffic already. But now they have onother 8-10 months of closed traffic over the bridge. Good Luck.

Concerned -- not sure what your rant is about. What mayor are you talking about???

It was out of the people's choice many years ago. And work just started this spring.

So, who are you mad at???

concerned taxpayer wrote:

So! It would have been less costly to tear down the whole bridge and build a new one instead. But! Low and behold, the railroad would not hear of it because they didn't want a crossing liability. Also the business owners would lose money if the bridge was closed. Who is running this city? The railroad and business owners, or the mayor and city council? How come the taxpayers were not asked if they wanted to save money by tearing down the bridge and build a new one. Of course not.Because if they had a special election, the minority would not have gotten their way.But, a new bridge would already be running and the city would have benn a little richer, and the business owners would have normal traffic already. But now they have onother 8-10 months of closed traffic over the bridge. Good Luck.

Lets see. There is a fire on State St by Joe Wolf field. No problem. Just drive down Ashland St to So Church St to Hodges Cross Rd to Curran Highway to the fire. Makes sense to me.

I believe they make sure the lanes are wide enough for firetruck and ambulance access