Proposed St. Croix River Crossing gets important U.S. House approval
March 1, 2012 at 4:33 am in New Richmond News
The U.S. House of Representatives voted 333-89 on Thursday morning to exempt the proposed new St. Croix River Crossing project from the restrictions of the Federal Wild & Scenic Riverway Act.
Continue Reading
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
27
So you’ve never had to travel this bridge? Never got stuck in weekend or rush-hour downtown Stillwater traffic?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
24
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
14
I have no idea where you get your “facts” that this bridge is safe.. Please read up here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stillwater_Bridge_%28St._Croix_River%29
“In addition, the bridge has been deemed “structurally deficient” by inspectors, receiving a sufficiency rating of 32.8 on a 100-point scale, as of June 23, 2008″
Like or Dislike:
10 
3
OK, saw your link.. But proclaiming it “safe” is different from saying it is not structurally deficient. If it was as “safe” as MnDot wants you to believe, then why do they continue to drop the weight restrictions for trucks??
Like or Dislike:
8 
3
50+ years is all it took for people to realize this needed to be done! I was beginning to believe the only way a new bridge would get built was for the old one to fall into the river.
I know this, once the new bridge is built my family will spend a lot more time downtown Stillwater than we do now. Way too much traffic down there to enjoy the day.. with main traffic routed around the city shopping down there will be so much more enjoyable!
Like or Dislike:
12 
4
So we should build a $690 million bridge for shopping convenience??
Like or Dislike:
4 
11
We get it, you don’t like the idea of a new bridge. You’d rather wait for it to fall into the river like the 35W bridge did before replacing it. This bridge has been in the works for 50+ years and has been needed for the traffic issues for the past 25. Had the bridge been built 15 years ago you could have cut that cost in half.. So if you want to complain about the overall money figure, please contact the Sierra Club.
Like or Dislike:
16 
4
Mr. Raihala, it is not a $690M dollar bridge. It is a $290M bridge with another $340M to apease the Sierra Club et all on “environmental mitigation”. In the end the Sierra Club should be sued for the cost run up that they are soley responsible for. Then they turn it around and say that the proposed bridge is too expensive. Your “six mile” detour is really 12 miles. Go ahead, try and get from Stillwater to Houlton and back in 6 miles without going over “the bridge”. Add it up, thats 24 miles RT. We finally get the bridge we should of had 50 yrs ago. JK
Like or Dislike:
5 
2
That’s the same ignorant comment Sean Duffy made on the House floor. But……..the cost still totals $690 million! Nobody is going to cut a check to the Sierra Club for $340 million. I’m sure that figure is a wide estimate and once the bridge is built, the shores are restored and whatever wetland mitigation is needed is done there will be leftover.
Like or Dislike:
1 
4
I don’t think anybody “get’s it” and it’s not really about this bridge. It’s about people demanding to make cuts to save the financial sovereignty of this country as long as the cuts don’t affect ME. Conservative media talks about the tipping point, that being based on the ones receiving the handouts exceed 50%, but I think along with the ME crowd we are way past that and a $690 million bridge that supposedly serves only 18,000 vehicles is one way of proving it.
Really, it takes a MN Democrat Congresswoman, Betty McCollum, to point out that the bridge is a monument to government waste! We have Sean Duffy proclaiming on the House floor “You have Vikings and Packers supporting this bill”, huh? I guess that settles it then. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/appearance/601347800
Like or Dislike:
4 
6
Don I guess your an expert on the bridge since you live in the Superior wisconsin area. your profile gives your zip code.
Like or Dislike:
8 
3
Not an expert on bridges, but I do possess the ability to waste an extraordinary amount of time trying to understand every aspect of how and why this country seems to be bent on self destruction.
Now that the ink has dried on this “one bridge” Congressional bill one has to wonder what will become of the 1000’s of other structurally deficient bridges across this nation. Are those that unanimously favored building the Stillwater Bridge also in favor of spending 100’s of billions of dollars that we do not have on bridges that you will never travel? How much more are you willing to be taxed or what programs are you willing to do without to pay for these other bridges? Someone has to pay for these bridges, right?
Like or Dislike:
2 
4
There a lot more things that need to be cut to stop the out of control spending.. Bridges that are falling apart and could cost life’s if they were to fall like the 35W bridge should be the LAST thing cut.
If the US wants to compete globally we have to have the infrastructure in place to do so.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1
You’re almost their Shane. A couple more comments about who’se going to pay for all of this and you’ll finally realize how truely piped we are. Nice, adding infrastructure to the list! Highways, railways, shipping ports, airports, underground infrastructure, whatever…….could drop a couple trillion on that and not even make a dent.
The Federal government borrows 42% of every dollar it spends. The only way to rectify that unsustainable nightmare is raise everyone’s tax burden by 42% OR Massively cut spending by 42%. And that just gets us to break even ~ a balanced budget. And we still have $15.3 trillion dollars of past stupidity to deal with. I don’t see any room for infrastructure, do you?
Like or Dislike:
1 
5