DutchRailnut wrote:gone be interesting in SoNo if they ever build a new bridge, historic buildings on both sides, so something is gone have to give.
on one side historic district, and a new parking garage. on other side a historic factory, maritime center and the city sewage plant.
ohhh boy this will be fun.
Backshophoss wrote:Wonder how many times this was shoved on to the back burner in Hartford,this was a long time coming,now it's
a diaster waiting to happen,the entire City of Norwalk will get effected if Walk fails again to the point of useless scrap metal.
There's no easy way around it,or room to build.
Would they really need to build a new span next
to the existing one? Unless the approaches are in need of replacement or serious rehab work AFAIK it's just the swing span itself that needs replacement or major fixing. And even if the whole bridge did indeed need replacement couldn't the approaches be replaced 2 tracks at a time (if the approach bridges are 2 track spans) while the old swing span is swapped out for a new one? The latter was done @ the Third Avenue Bridge in the Bronx about 10 years ago so it should work for WALK.
If that was the proposal no doubt the city would be rightly so up in arms about it. It would require essentially reconfiguring/demolishing/rebuilding an entire section of the downtown area. The only way I think such a project could even begin to be justified is if the curves between the South Norwalk station and the bridge as well as between the bridge and the East Norwalk station were to be straightened out for higher speeds as long as there would be new approaches built to the bridge on both sides.
runningwithscalpels wrote:Seems to me old Danny boy is taking a page out of Bloomie's playbook. Latch on to what the public hates the most and get any sound bite (and unnecessary uh's and um's) in that he can. (Likely he also figures "If everyone sees me crap on Metro North with them they'll forget about all the other ways I've screwed the state come November.")
I hope someone informed him that he and his predecessors bear a lot of the blame for this.
I'm afraid part of the problem is that more than enough commuters, taxpayers, etc. honestly don't know and/or understand just how old and worn out how many pieces their state's infrastructure are. Furthermore they only get an idea of the situation when something like this goes down. And when it comes to those in public office they either might not understand themselves or -if they do- they know they may have a hard time explaining things like this to the general public (non-railroads/railfans for example). On top of that, explaining why millions upon millions need to be spent on projects that don't exactly result in "Oooh" and Ahhh".