Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
OT: I-35W bridge collapse in Minneapolis

Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="Semper Vaporo"] If you will remember, some comedian said:"Remember: Interstate bridges are built by the lowest bidder."This alluding to the fact that they MIGHT not be safe.Now, one has collapsed, adding credence to the quip.Could the Authorities have awarded the bid to the lowest bidder this time, without public recrimination for doing so?Would it be prudent for the news media to begin some journalistic investigation as to why it was not awarded to the lowest bidder?  What kind of headline would this be:"The old bridge fell down, why aren't we building a cheaper one!" [/quote]I know the joke about getting something you want to be safe built by the lowest bidder. However, it seems to me that there should not be any connection between the bid price and the safety or quality of the bridge.  There would definitely be a correlation between the quality, strength, and durability of the bridge as those characteristics are embodied in the design.  If you design an inferior bridge, its performance will reflect that, but the performance should not be affected by the construction.  If the contract is properly enforced, you get the same bridge, no matter whether the bid is high or low.While the bidders on the I35W bridge apparently were given latitude on the design and style of the structure, it is ultimately up to the state to design a bridge that won't fall down.  Ideally, they would then get multiple bids on that specific bridge, then consider price, delivery, and competence, and then select the best-suited bidder on that basis.    Selecting a high or low bid would have no effect on the strength, durability, or longevity of the bridge, because those characteristics would be established by the design and specifications.  It would be up to the state to guarantee that the specifications have been met.  Many politicians blamed the collapse on a lack of funds for proper maintenance, but of course this is nonsense.  A lack of funds cannot possibly be the reason for the collapse.  This is axiomatic because the state has a responsibility to know the bridge's condition, and maintain it in safe condition.  If they cannot perform either one of these tasks for any reason, they must close the bridge.  Letting the bridge collapse for lack of funding would be criminal.  Even MNDOT officials ran for the hills when they heard the reckless politicians blaming the collapse on Minnesotans not paying enough taxes.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag