Hi folks;

I'm back from a day driving my mother-in-law all around Queens, to take care of some business.

Sorry, I'm not buying the arguments above that the cost of this bridge is driven higher by the density of the city. This bridge is being built in an area of the city that is relatively low-density, especially on the Queens side.

RF: I wasn't born yesterday, and know darn well that the cost includes the interchanges (I'm a mechancial engineer).

I agree with Minard. This bridge will probably cost double the projected amount. The cost situation in NYC is outrageous.

Posted by: benson at November 6, 2009 7:04 PM in response to New Kosciuszko Bridge Won't Come Cheap

Maly;

Please refer to IMBY's comparison.

Your comparison is flawed. That bridge was built under a crash program to replace a collapsed bridge.

I would refer you to do the math in IMBY's example. 4 km = approximately almost 13,000 feet.

Posted by: benson at November 6, 2009 9:54 AM in response to New Kosciuszko Bridge Won't Come Cheap

IMBY;

Thank you!!!!

Posted by: benson at November 6, 2009 9:50 AM in response to New Kosciuszko Bridge Won't Come Cheap

Oh and Pete, one more thing.

The asking price for the Gingerbrad house was 12.5 million. Unless there is a new math out there, the cost of this bridge would therefore be 80 times that amount. Hence my order-of-magnitude statement that you were off by a factor of 100.

Posted by: benson at November 6, 2009 9:48 AM in response to New Kosciuszko Bridge Won't Come Cheap

Pete;

Nice try. It will require physical labor to build a bridge ANYWHER, and corporations will be in charge of the contracting ANYWHERE. The big difference between NYC and other places are these: unions and their onerous work rules, and the heavy regulations here.

How much would it cost to build this bridge outside of NYC?? I would wager anyone on this site that it would cost 50% less. The reason?? Once again, the toxic combination of unions, heavy taxation and onerous regulations.

Posted by: benson at November 6, 2009 9:44 AM in response to New Kosciuszko Bridge Won't Come Cheap

DIBS;

Fill in the creek?!?!?!?! Aren't you concerned about the ancient multi-ethnic burial grounds on the bottom of this creek????

You're banished from this site for 24 hours, for speaking such heresy.

Posted by: benson at November 6, 2009 9:33 AM in response to New Kosciuszko Bridge Won't Come Cheap

Uh, Pete, I think your math is off by a factor of about 100 or so. We're talking ONE BILLION DOLLARS to basically build an overpass over a small creek.

Posted by: benson at November 6, 2009 9:29 AM in response to New Kosciuszko Bridge Won't Come Cheap

Repeat this fact to yourself over and over again: ONE BILLION DOLLARS to build an insignificant bridge.

Ain't the present mix of unions and heavy regulations in NYC grand???? No wonder this town has lost most of its business sectors except those that are flush with money (Wall St.).

Remember this number when you hear all the lofty pronouncements on this site about the need for subsidized housing, unions, heavy environmental regulations, more regulation of the building trades, etc. : ONE BILLION DOLLARS to build a bridge.

Posted by: benson at November 6, 2009 9:23 AM in response to New Kosciuszko Bridge Won't Come Cheap

"I don't understand why would anyone argue against this"

Well,allow me to do so.

It is all very nice for us here on the east coast to argue for things like cap-and-trade, since we don't manufacture anything here anymore.

Who will take the hit from cap-and-trade? Manufacturers, that's who - the sector of the economy that has been hit the hardest.

You want to see the US lose the rest of its industry? Hit them up with cap-and-trade. Yeah, that's the ticket for making sure that the rest of it is packed off to China. Of course, neither China nor Indai will hear a thing about caps, because they, unlike us, still care about their manufacturing sector.

So, to anwer your question: I don't want to see our economy have another shackle put on it for the sake of some phenomenon that is not yet proven.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 4:32 PM in response to Open Thread

OK, clarification. When I talk of "global warming", I mean man-made global warming.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 4:27 PM in response to Open Thread

Bxgrl;

The debate over gloabl warming is not a disagreement about some scientific principles. There are no fundamental scientific principles at stake. The deabte is over the results of scientific modelling, which is a WHOLE other animal.

This modelling involves literally 10's of thousands of line of computer code, massive amounts of data, and hundreds of modelling assumptions. As such, it is highly susceptible to error.

I am not disparaging the work of any scientist who is doing research in this field. As I said above, it may turn out that there is indeed global warming. What I am against are those who want to politicize the debate, and want to declare it "closed". Anyone who talks like that is not acting in the scientific method.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 4:15 PM in response to Open Thread

THL;

I was joking - see my last line.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 4:06 PM in response to Open Thread

Well, talk about a strange coincidence....

I had to pull away from the OT because I received a call from a company that is interested in using fiber-optic sensors to measure the effect of melting glaciers on the temperature profile of the ocean.

I know you're probably all wondering -with baited breath - about how fiber optics can be used to measure temperature. Why, I'd be happy to explain. When you sent a pulse of single-wavelenth light down an optical fiber, there is a phenomenon known as "back-scattering", in which some light is transmitted back. One type of back-scattering is called "Raman back scattering" and there are two components to it. One component is light that is reflected back at a slightly higher wavelength than the original transmission. Another is light that is reflected back at a slightly lower wavelength. It turns out that the ratio of these two forms of backscattering is directly propertional to the fiber's temperature. How about that??? So, if you hook up the fiber to an optical time-domain reflectometer, one can derive the temperature at every point along the fiber. The fiber becomes a sensor!!!

OK, everybody, wake up - the lecture is over.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 3:59 PM in response to Open Thread

Arkaday;

I don't disagree that it is a good thing to clean up the environment and develop alternative sources of energy. What bugs me about Al Gore and his crowd is that they act just like a doomsday preacher. I caught him on Charlie Rose last night and his claims were preposterous.

Yes, let's develop clean alternative energy in a rational, economical manner, not prompted by a Chicken Little who is claiming that the sky is falling.

By the way, one thing that folks should note about Al Gore: he profits (in real $$$) from his fear-mongering techniques.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 3:25 PM in response to Open Thread

11217;

I am an engineer who has a minor in statistics. For a good part of my career, I was involved in statistical modelling of processes (in my case, it involved the characteristics of optical fiber). Precisely because of that experience in statistical modelling, I am wary of the global warming claims. Not saying that they may not be true, but I know that to model any process involves alot of assumptions, and your results are only as good as those assumptions. I am especially wary of those who claim that "the debate is over" or run around predicting doomsday. Anybody who does any kind of modelling is always open to improvements in it. I continually worked to improve my statistical modelling.

Finally, I am always wary when science wades into the field of politics, as has happened with this issue.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 3:17 PM in response to Open Thread

Snappy;

To go back to the advertising discussion a bit. I'm not sure that advertising directly changes a person's mind, but perhaps reinforce the strength (or weakness) of a product.

I can only give you the example of my own company. When I first joined my company, we had an active program of advertising and trade-show attendance in our market segment. After the dot-com implosion, it was drastically cut back, and has never recovered. It has lead to a widespread impression in that market segement that my company is no longer a leader in it, and is no longer heavily invested in it (which turns out to be the actual case). In other words, our lack of advertising has reinforced the impression that we are weak in this segment.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 2:47 PM in response to Open Thread

Snappy;

She was pretty high up (5th floor). It was the living room window that faced the BQE, not (fortunately) her bedroom.

Now she lives in Greenwood Heights and REALLY loves it.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 2:36 PM in response to Open Thread

My daughter's last apartment overlooked the BQE. Certainly not a dream place, but it wasn't that bad. The noise was suprisingly low.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 2:32 PM in response to Open Thread

" Do they ever really change anybody's mind?"

Snappy,

If the people who paid good money for these commercials didn't believe that they have some effect, you can bet that they wouldn't run them.

Advertising works. As Bill Clinton once wisely said to those who don't believe in the power of advertising: "OK, fine, don't advertise your product." (Clinton said this to politicians who were pooh-poohing the effectiveness of cigarette advertising).

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 2:09 PM in response to Open Thread

Denton;

Good news about your daughter. This morning I heard an interesting take on things. This fellow, a pollster, was predicting major political turmoil ahead if the net effect of TARP and the stimulus program is a revival of Wall Street, while the other areas of the country, and other sectors of the economy, continue to languish in high unemployment.

I think there is something to that thought. I am the last guy to engage in class warfare and Wall St. bashing, but I do think there it will simply not be palpable to common folks to see that the crwod who caused this crisis are back on top, while the remainder of the economy lies in shambles.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 12:50 PM in response to Open Thread

Putting together the two major events of this week:

I will cast my vote MULTIPLE TIMES for any mayoral candidate who promises to end ticker tape parades for a winning sports team, regardless of their position on any other issue.

These ticker tape parades are an example of why I'm turned off by most major league sports today, even though I was a rabid baseball player and fan when I was a kid.

I have two objections to these parades:

1) These players are supported all year by the fans. They make a damn good salary (and bully for them). WHEN will they in turn show some appreciation to the fans???? Why doesn't the Yankee organization throw some kind of party for their fans, or show their appreciation in some way?? I detest the fact that many players no longer give out free signatures, for instance. Let' not even talk about the outrageous prices they charge for food at Yankee stadium.

2) More importantly, these types of parades used to be reserved for heroes: soldiers, astronauts who risked death to explore space, etc. The Yankees are a great team, and they deserve their championship. They are not, however, "heroes". It speaks volumes about our society that the only ticker-tape parades we give nowadays are for entertainers/sports figures. We've gone through two wars, and no one even suggests of giving the vets such a parade.

Posted by: benson at November 5, 2009 11:34 AM in response to Open Thread

Make that "25 or 6 to 4" by Chicago

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 5:21 PM in response to Open Thread

To the tune of "25 or 5 to $" by Chicago:

Waiting for the end of work
Searching for something to write
Scrolling posts along the OT
Giving up I close my eyes
Sitting cross-legged in the cube
Twenty-five or six to five

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 5:19 PM in response to Open Thread

My eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the LPC;
They are trampling out those blueprints where the plans for Fedders are stored.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 5:02 PM in response to Open Thread

Set to the old Frank Sinatra tune "Love and Marriage"

Rob and 11217, Rob and 11217, Rob and 11217,

Ya can't have one without the ooootttthhherr

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 4:49 PM in response to Open Thread

First verse of "Born to be a PLUSA":

Get your keyboard runnin'
Head out on the OT
Lookin' for adventure
And whatever comes our way
Yeah Darlin' go make it happen
Take the world in a love embrace
Fire all of your sockpuppets at once
And explode into space

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 4:42 PM in response to Open Thread

Me and you and a sock puppet named boo.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 4:31 PM in response to Open Thread

I'm producing a new "Best of Brownstoner" page, titled"

"Sockpuppets Gone Wild"

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 4:21 PM in response to Open Thread

""Expert, do you know what "versatile" means??"

Been there done that!"

Expert;

I'm having trouble grasping the "thrust" of your point.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 3:42 PM in response to Open Thread

Is Paul dead?

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 3:05 PM in response to Open Thread

DIBS;

Nope. Will rent.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 2:28 PM in response to Open Thread

DIBS;

I refuse to visit Philly after they took Rocky's statue off of the museum steps. Snobs.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 2:22 PM in response to Open Thread

Speaking of restaurants...

I had to drive up to manchester, NH on Monday. My hosts took me out to eat at "Fratello's Italian Ristorante". Classic "Eye-talian". One of the specials was, and I kid you not, broiled haddock topped with "seasoned Ritz breadcrumbs"

Seasoned.....Ritz.....Cracker....Breadcrumbs.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 2:18 PM in response to Open Thread

Brokedeveloper;

OK - didn't realize it was a children's book too. Actually, that phrase did come into a past discussion, and I didn't remember that you were part of it.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 1:56 PM in response to Open Thread

Brokedeveloper;

How did you know about Green eggs and ham?? Just curious.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 1:49 PM in response to Open Thread

Biff;

If you recall, when Minard first appeared on the scene, he was quite friendly to you and DIBS, as if he already knew you.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 1:18 PM in response to Open Thread

11217;

Sam was amiguous about where he lived. At first, it seemed that he lived in BH, then later he would say PS.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 1:13 PM in response to Open Thread

CGar;

It is not unknown for folks to have multiple ID's,ya know.

Bxgrl;

On the contrary,I remember Sam once responding to Montrose in one of her Walkabout posts about his friendship with some of the key people in the preservation movement (the Ottner's and the guy who wrote the "Brick and Brownstones" book).

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 1:06 PM in response to Open Thread

Methinks I figured out who "Minard" is.

See this post from him today:

"suck it up and buy a car. In the end, all grown-ups living in the Boros know that a private car, expensive as it is to own and garage, is the only reliable form of transportation. Car-pool with neighbors to be environment-friendly. New cars are very clean and fuel-efficient. Don't expect public transit or the public sector to meet your needs or make your life better or more convenient. The MTA is on a downward slide and the transit worker union is doing everything in its power to limit the ferries or other forms of private public transit so that when they strike the city can be brought more fully to its knees. "

Who used to extoll the virtues of cars, use the term "grown-up", knew alot about architecture and had it in for 11217??

Does the name "Sam" ring a bell?

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 12:58 PM in response to Open Thread

Snappy;

Good point. Cancel the firemen call. Please call for the nubile nurses with the burn ointment. Come to think of it, I've got burns all over. Two nurses will be needed for this job!

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 12:25 PM in response to Election 2009: No Big Surprises in Brooklyn

Hey, can someone call the fire department???? My arse is on fire from Bxgrl's post!!!

;-)

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 12:15 PM in response to Election 2009: No Big Surprises in Brooklyn

"OK, Benson, now you're being disingenuous. First you extol the virtues of building a firehouse, and then propose we have too many fireman."

Snark;

Not at all. I'm not making any statement regarding the number of firemen, as I have no expertise in that area. What I am saying is that if the Mayor cuts the number of firemen, and the level of fatalities does not rise, then he has done a good thing. It is up to the executive, NOT the unions, to make this call. He's the one who is accountable on this issue.

Regardless of the proper number of firemen, I would want them to have top-notch facilities. In my mind, the issues are separate.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 12:13 PM in response to Election 2009: No Big Surprises in Brooklyn

Bxgrl;

Your arguments above are exactly those of an insurance sales person who tries to sell me a policy that is well more than what I need.

The civil service unions have used this fear-mongering for years to try to argue against cuts. Basically, it's the same issue as with educational testing - accountability.

I believe that deaths and injuries by fire are near a historic low in NYC, and likewise the murder rate. That's the bottom line for me. If you feel differently, fine by me.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 11:56 AM in response to Election 2009: No Big Surprises in Brooklyn

"as many analysts have said, don't get too happy over the off year elections- "

Oh,ok.

Yeeeeeeeeessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:-)

:-)

:-)

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 11:35 AM in response to Open Thread

Bxgrl;

I am not talking about the renovation of the firehouse on 4th Ave and 6th Street. I am talking about a brand new building on 4th and around 40th Street. Moreover, whether it was new or not is beside the point. The point is that he made investments in public facilities in non-rich areas.

As for the firehouse closings. If the statistics prove them to be meritorious (i.e. no increase in fire-related injuries and fatalities), then I say: bully for Bloomberg!! THIS is what a good manager is supposed to do: allocate resources where they are need, not where the civil-service unions say they should be allocated (in order to preseve their jobs).

PS: Yeeeeeessssssss!!!!!!

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 11:25 AM in response to Election 2009: No Big Surprises in Brooklyn

"WHO'S YOUR DADDY?"

Mike "three term" Bloomberg, Norfolk-Southern railway, Ford Motor and the NY Yankees.

I go with winners.

PS: Yeeeeeessssssss!!!

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 11:11 AM in response to Open Thread

CMU;

If you think I am advocating for the bail-out of GM or Chrysler, you are dead wrong. I think that the federal government should not have given these companies ONE cent. They should have gone into chapter 11, tore up their contract with the UAW, and started again.

BTW: I appreciate your dismissive tone.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 11:07 AM in response to Open Thread

Snark

You are being disingenuous today.

It's one thing to build new public facilities in an area with a growing population of immigrants that needs these services, it's quite another to be in the hip pocket of the civil-service unions.

Examples of the latter are not pushing the much-needed reform of the pension and health-care benefits of the civil-service workers. Pension costs are skyrocketing for the city and state, and are consuming a greater share of an already-strained budget. Thomson would have done NOTHING about this issue, simply because he would be at the beck and call of the unions, as are ALL machine politicians in this city.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 11:03 AM in response to Election 2009: No Big Surprises in Brooklyn

Note that after Muffie made her comment about the OT and "getting back to work", she kept on posting in the election thread.

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 10:58 AM in response to Open Thread

"Which is obviously so much worse than Bloomie, who only allows the rich to slurp from his trough."

Really?? You mean the two new public school buildings that were built on 4th Ave in Sunset Park were for the rich? Also, the new firehouse on 4th Ave in Sunset Park was also for the rich?

I surely knew that the complete renovation of the BQE and 100's of parks in all sorts of neighborhoods was for the rich, but who knew that public schools on 4th Ave were for the rich?!?!?!

Posted by: benson at November 4, 2009 10:51 AM in response to Election 2009: No Big Surprises in Brooklyn