On Wednesday, incumbent Congressman Lee Terry and challenger Tom White debated at the Omaha Press Club. Like many debates, it was pretty much all over the place. Standard stuff, really — no big deal.But a tweet from Sean Weide really caught my attention: "Tom White just lost my vote by saying the Bob Kerrey pedestrian/bicycle bridge was the biggest waste of taxpayer money."
Whoa. Enage firestorm from the cycling community.
As it turns out, White was talking about a different bridge — the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" that popped up in the mid-2000s. Whoops. Better be a little more clear about pork-barrel spending when the downtown pedestrian bridge has, itself, been called a bridge to nowhere. (White apologized personally to pretty much everybody who voiced displeasure with that, including myself.)
Those who have actually used it, of course, know it's far from a bridge to nowhere. Council Bluffs has more than 30 miles of paved trails and tons of bike lanes. The Loess Hills feature some of the most beautiful roads and climbs within 100 miles of here. And the bridge is crawling with people pretty much all the time.
It's true that in that picture, behind the trees on the far side of the river, there's not much going on. But, really, I don't care about that. I can get across the river safely and explore the other side.
Once this whole thing got rolling Thursday afternoon, there was plenty of dissent. "Too expensive." "We don't need it."
Look, the money is spent. Get over it (read all of that "Bridge to Nowhere" link, by the way, especially the end piece about the "Road to Nowhere."). And if you're cool with taking your bike for a drive every time you want to ride, I guess you really don't need to worry about alternate routes across the river.
My stance: It's an amenity we're lucky to have.
Your stance: Go to it.
9 comments:
There are now 4 routes over into Iowa and possibly another one coming down the pike. There's the BK bridge (awesomest), the South Omaha Vet Memorial bridge (near trail completion on Iowa side and almost as awesome as BK), the Bellevue toll bridge (not so awesome for $.50 and occasional buzzing by motorists), and the Plattesmouth toll bridge (now with a $.50 toll after a nice renovation, but barely traveled(also the road East is closed for now so don't use it)).
The other bridge coming up is the hwy 34 Missouri River crossing that may or may not benefit cyclists at all. If a sidepath were included with the bridge and a shoulder on hwy 34 on Iowa's side, it would be an easy route to ride from the Keystone trail to Glennwood without paying for toll bridges or dealing with that traffic. This would be also awesome.
To the original question, was the BK bridge worth it? I'd like to see an official count of how many people use the bridge on average daily. I think the numbers would show it was well worth the cost.
Eh, I don't see a ton of value as a cyclist for the Plattsmouth bridge, considering how far south it is.
Bellevue is good enough, at best. At the wrong time of day, that road from I-29 to the bridge is scary as hell.
Plattsmouth brige road is sweet on NE side and it takes u right to my favorite gravel county mills.. it's pretty dope
I agree Rafal. That's one of my favorite hilly routes. The road into Plattesmouth has a couple good climbs, the climb to the toll bridge is sweet, then the road to Glennwood is nice and mellow before it really kicks up out of that town.
Bryan, Plattesmouth may be too far south to some one who lives too far north, but for us mid-towners, it's just fine. Now the 100 mile "Omaha" ride this weekend might be too far North considering it's NorthWest of Bennington, but that's just my mid-towner opinion.
Ok, since I've been slightly involved in the new Hwy 34 bridge crossing project I can tell you a couple things. 1) it will not be bike friendly (NDOR and IDOT did not incorporate the bike/ped lane) and the traffic volumes expected would make it sketchy; and 2) the new 34 route will bypass Plattsmouth and other Mills County roads which are bike friends...I wouldn't ride it if my life depended on it.
Now putting on my economist hat...
I know CB has big plans for their side of the waterfront to which the Ped Bridge to No Where(pardon the joke) connects. Most of it is future plans but ultimately it should be realized.
From a recreation benefit standpoint I'm sure it has done wonders for the area. Bryan and everyone else is correct it gets ton of usage.
The problem, most of the recreation is not necessarily realized monetary benefits to local businesses such as people eating at restaurants. Note I say most. As I'm sure some will stop in at concert venues, the boatyard, downtown, etc.
The recreation benefits are somewhat harder to quantify but they do exist and from a social standpoint are more than enough to offset the construction and O&M of the bridge. And thats why public agencies build these projects, b/c private businesses don't recieve a private ROI on them, thus no incentive to undertake the project..this is truly a public good. The benefits are: improved health, recreational amenties, aestetics (its a beautiful bridge), and to some extent business revenues.
I could go on and on but I think you get my point...the problem with its justification I think some will hang it on, is the lack of realized monetary returns.
argue away.
J
The small government part of me dislikes it, the bike riding part of me likes it. I think the bike riding part of me wins in this case. However I think NE is much too heavy on the taxation, especially for as republican as we claim to be.
These types of investments are certainly hard to quantify, but take into consideration the construction associated with the bridge, you have highly taxed real estate on the Nebraska side and will soon have it on the CB side. Also there was a large amount of private investment that went along with the ICE-T funds for the project. So, of the $23M the federal government put up I'm sure over the long term it was an investment that will pay back many times over.
Also, if we wouldn't have taken it, it would have gone somewhere else, so enjoy it.
I've expressed my feelings on bridges here before. If all bridges had adequate pedestrian facilities, a pedestrian only bridge wouldn't be necessary. I'm in favore of the BK bridge, but would rather have multiple safe crossings than one dedicated pedestrian (albeit really fancy) one.
It's a travesty that the Hwy 34 bridge will not be pedestrian friendly. A multi-modal bridge design may cost a bit more, but it's infinitely cheaper than retrofitting or building another pedestrian only bridge later.
Oh yeah, for what it's worth, I usually cross the Missouri River at Blair. The bridge crossing is very safe. The downside is that the shoulder disappears a few hundred feet into Iowa.
Post a Comment