General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums'Bridge to Nowhere' is no more, as DOT chooses ferry for Ketchikan
Source: Alaska Dispatch News
The state of Alaska has decided that the best way to connect the city of Ketchikan with its airport on Gravina Island is a ferry, not the bridge the community had originally wanted and much of the nation mocked.
... The bridges days have been numbered since it was dubbed "The Bridge to Nowhere" a decade ago, and the project and the city became a bi-partisan punching bag in the fight against federal pork and the earmarks members of Congress used to fund such projects.
... Prominent Republicans such as Sen. John McCain opposed the bridge and the earmark process used to win funding for it, and new Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin stopped the project in 2007 after taking office. Later, after being named as McCain's vice-president running mate, Palin got wild cheers at the Republican National Convention when she told Congress, "Thanks, but no thanks," for the bridge money.
... Rep. Dan Ortiz, I-Ketchikan, said what Ketchikan really needs is a bridge, which is locally called a "hard link," but still welcomed DOT's Thursday ferry proposal after eight years of study.
Read more: http://www.adn.com/article/20151022/bridge-nowhere-no-more-dot-chooses-ferry-ketchikan
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Some days, one needs to get to an airport. And if the ferry isn't ready to shove off, there's a problem.
Ask someone who needs to get to air-evacuated to a hospital if they wish there was a bridge there.
Xithras
(16,191 posts)You've gotta remember two things:
1. Ketchikan is a quaint little town sitting on a major shipping lane, so the bridge would have needed to be high and massive. It would have completely dwarfed the town and dominated its skyline. Not everyone was happy with that.
2. The primary reason for building the bridge wasn't to reach the airport, but to open Gravina Island to developers. Later versions even broke the single massive bridge into two bridges linking on a large island in the sound, so that the smaller island could be developed as well. The state and city admitted as much on multiple occasions. Accessing the airport was simply the "official" reason they gave to justify the federal governments involvement. The reality is that Gravina Island is 100 square miles of nearly uninhabited Alaska forest and developers want to start building on it. The bridge wasn't really intended to service the current inhabitants of Ketchikan (most of which are perfectly content with a ferry), but was actually a federally funded gift to land speculators and developers.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The backstory fills in the picture.
A college buddy of ours tended bar in Ketchikan, a place filled with tourist boat traffic. About a year ago, the guy wasn't feeling well and came to Seattle or Detroit (one or the other) to see his doctor, found out he has leukemia. He needs chemo in Seattle.
From what I understood, his town is so remote, you can only get there by boat or plane. I thought a bridge would be good for him and the economy. Should've figured the Have-Mores would be first in line.