Mike O'Callaghan- Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge

Quote: rxwine

Well, I don't know. There's a reason (although it's not the same thing) why patents run out. And books go into public domain. Anyway, thers's something about power sources, water, and air (what was the movie where one person controlled the air on Mars)

It begins to feel like the Corleone family has a resource tied up, and were all prisoner to their whims.

I'm still thinking about it though.

Total Recall, with Ahnold.

Quote: mkl654321

Bureau of Reclamation dams, Army Corps of Engineers dams, etc. that were built primarily as cash flow generators were justified by using extremely unrealistic cost-benefit calculations. Virtually no dam built in the period 1920-1990 justified its cost, even over the long term. Hoover/Boulder was supposed to have paid for itself in twenty years. It took over eighty.

My Understanding is that the Grand Coulee dam paid for it self by around 1960.

mkl, do you object to a fully-paid-for public works project being used to generate revenue that is used to benefit the public? For example, could a toll bridge be fully paid for and yet have tolls continue to be collected to maintain or improve other highways in addition to the bridge? Wouldn't that be simpler than making another new road a toll road until it is paid for?

Yes, I understood that the manufacturing plant was not completely analogous to a public works project. I was just trying to illustrate that once something is paid for, it shouldn't be treated as if it's residual value must not be exploited to benefit either the private owner or the public owner. Maybe I didn't make a very good comparison.

Quote: thecesspit

My Understanding is that the Grand Coulee dam paid for it self by around 1960.

The benefit-cost ratio of Grand Coulee was higher than later dams on the Columbia, because it was the first major dam in the river system. As such, it offered flood-control and water-storage benefits that the subsequent main-stem dams on the Columbia did not. No later dam on the Columbia offered a benefit-cost ratio of greater than .61, even when considering power revenues.

I don't know about the date that Grand Coulee paid for itself, in terms of was both the initial cost, and the accumlated interest on the debt paid for by 1960--the later hydroelectric upgrades were supposed to be much more cost-effective than the earlier installations. Several costs that were never (and never have been) accounted for are the displacement and relocation of 3,000 people (most of whom were Indians, so they didn't really count), the destruction of the salmon fishery (there used to be an annual harvest of over half a million fish), and the subsidizing of low power rates by the taxpayers (power was sold below cost until WWII). But as has so often happened in the US, the dam's overcapacity (it produced much more power than was needed) was all sucked up by manufacturing demand in the Pacific Northwest at the outbreak of WWII---particularly aircraft manufacture, since aluminum fabrication requires immense amounts of electricity. We were lucky that the dam was built at the wrong time for the wrong reason.

Quote: Doc

mkl, do you object to a fully-paid-for public works project being used to generate revenue that is used to benefit the public? For example, could a toll bridge be fully paid for and yet have tolls continue to be collected to maintain or improve other highways in addition to the bridge? Wouldn't that be simpler than making another new road a toll road until it is paid for?

Yes, I understood that the manufacturing plant was not completely analogous to a public works project. I was just trying to illustrate that once something is paid for, it shouldn't be treated as if it's residual value must not be exploited to benefit either the private owner or the public owner. Maybe I didn't make a very good comparison.

I object to such cash-cow public works projects on general principles, because such works are never proposed with the idea of "this will earn money for the US Treasury". In your example, the bridge toll would fall disproportionately on the users of the bridge, presumably mostly locals. This would not be so bad, but in the case where the collected tolls exceed the operating costs of the bridge (the bridge, as you say, already having been fully paid for), the excess amounts to a tax on the locals, which gets dumped into the general operating fund. This is a use tax that does not benefit the users, except in their role as citizens of the entire country.

Infrastructure maintenance should be paid for from general revenues, and equally importantly, the burden should be spread out among all taxpayers. To ding the people who use toll bridges to pay for the maintenance of roads that benefit the entire citizenry seems very unfair to me. For that matter, the idea of gasoline taxes as "use taxes" that pay for road maintenance is also wrong, because a functional road network benefits ALL citizens, not just those who actively use it. The little old lady who doesn't own a car may use the buses and taxis that run on public roads, and she will doubtless be grateful for those roads' existence if she has to call an ambulance.

The "residual value" of a public works project is simply its amortized value less accumulated depreciation. Its utility up to that point, and to the end of its useful life, is a return on investment for the taxpayers. To divert that utility to some other purpose/area/revenue stream is to betray the purpose of creating that public work in the first place.

I guess that I am not familiar with toll bridge fees going into the US Treasury. The ones that I know about have the fees going to the state, so that it is likely that most of the local toll payers would derive benefits from whichever way the state uses any excess revenues.

The little old lady you described as grateful for a road's existence probably helped pay for it through the gasoline taxes covered by her taxi and bus fares -- if she's using the roads, she's probably helping to pay for them whether she owns a car or not.

I don't think I meant "residual value" in its tax sense but rather as a remaining value that could be used to continue generating revenue. I don't really view the continued collection of tolls to be a betrayal of purpose, so long as the revenue is used to benefit the same populace that was benefiting from the original project. I think that is just simpler than making each new road a toll road until it has paid for itself.

And it seems that once again I have diverted a thread from its intended topic. Oh, well. Someone please tell me when the bridge is really open.

Quote: Doc

And it seems that once again I have diverted a thread from its intended topic. Oh, well. Someone please tell me when the bridge is really open.

And I wonder just how strong was the temptation, or will be in the future, to make the new bridge a toll bridge. If you don't want to pay $10, you can always go back the old way and crawl across the dam.

I know that Harrah's would charge $30 if it owned the bridge. Wait a minute--they just bought it with revenue from junk bond sales!!! Total Rewards members get a 25% discount on bridge tolls!! There's an eighty-foot-high portrait of Gary Loveman carved into the rock face above the bridge!!! NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

I finally made it there yesterday. Here is a preview of my report.

Quote: Wizard

I finally made it there yesterday. Here is a preview of my report.

Was it scary driving across the bridge? I have bridgephobia and I had to drive across the Golden Gate for 2 years decades ago. I freeze up, its not pretty. A bridge I won't drive across is the Mackinaw Bridge which connects the peninsula's of MI. It has porous iron grate for a roadbed because of the high winds and you can see right thru it when you're driving. There are surrogate truck drivers always on duty to drive the big rigs across for the nervous truckers who can't do it.

There are 5-foot concrete barriers on both sides of the bridge, and in the center (median). From a passenger car or truck, you can't see over the edge. The deck is solid pavement. Honestly, you'd never know that you were on the bridge. It's just like any other section of roadway.

I didn't drive across it, because I parked on the Nevada side and biked/walked the rest of the way. However, anyone with bridgephobia should have no problem with this one. It is solid pavement below, with walls on either side, as well as the median.

I have never heard of bridgephobia before. What would it take for you to try the Grand' rel='nofollow' target='_blank'>http://www.grandcanyonskywalk.com/]Grand Canyon skywalk?

Quote: Wizard

What would it take for you to try the Grand' rel='nofollow' target='_blank'>http://www.grandcanyonskywalk.com/]Grand Canyon skywalk?

Hard drugs.

Great report, thanks. I get on a plane in 8 hours for Las Vegas and one of things I plan to do is visit the new bridge, probably Monday morning. After driving through the construction numerous times and following the project online it will be interesting to see it completed.

As for those postcards, it appears to me at least a few of them may have been photo shopped. I don't see the distinctive white bathtub ring on Lake Mead in them. And if you compare them to those from the bypass project web site you can see the difference. For instance, compare the bottom left postcard to this picture:

http://www.hooverdambypass.org/ConstructionPhotos/ColoradoRiverBridge%2810_2010%29/C-FHWA-004-449_lowrez.jpg

The postcard also shows the water level at the top of the towers, and I believe it has been a while since that has happened.

Quote: Wizard

I finally made it there yesterday. Here is a preview of my report.

A couple comments:

About the name: Yeah, I read your opening remarks. I would think the common / unofficial name would be "Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge" or simply, the "Bypass Bridge". But, even the official Bypass website continuously refers to it as the "Hoover Dam Bridge", making only a couple token references to it's official name. What's the opinion of locals?

Regarding trafic: The bridge makes for a much easier, four lane, straight line crossing, as opposed to the curvy two lane passage over the dam. Since 9/11 trucks were prohibited over the dam. I read somewhere that traffic is expected to get WORSE when the bridge opens and trucks return to Route 93. Any word on this?

In the fourth paragraph:

Quote:

If you take the exit, it will take you to Hoover Dam, and the parking lot for pedestrian access to the bridge. If you're heading into Arizona afterward, be warned that you can't rejoin the 93 on the Arizona side.

That second 'If' sounds like the this is if you did NOT take the exit. Change it to 'If you continue into Az...'

Is driving over the dam still allowed? What purpose is there to crossing the dam, other than the novelty of it?

Personally, I would have expected access to the dam from either side, but no traffic other than official/emergency vehicles on the dam itself.

Seventh paragraph:

Quote:

On the bridge itself there is about a four foot wide pedestrian lane on north side, facing the bridge.

Didn't you mean '...facing the dam'?


All in all, nice review, and nice photos!

Quote: EvenBob

Was it scary driving across the bridge? I have bridgephobia ...

I would assume that it would be difficult for you to cross.

Although this doesn't have the 'invisible' roadbed you talk about, it doesn't have any visible means of support. At least not visible as you cross.

Quote: EvenBob

... Mackinaw Bridge ... There are surrogate truck drivers always on duty to drive the big rigs across for the nervous truckers who can't do it.

Does that mean you ride in the passenger seat? Seems to me that such a fear would prevent you from crossing at all...

The bridge should have been named the "Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge" period. Adding in the long name of a newspaper editor who served during the Korean War is ridiculous. NOBODY gave more for his country than Pat Tillman, and to water down his sacrifice by tossing in some LV hack when naming that bridge is a downright crime.

Quote: JerryLogan

The bridge should have been named the "Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge" period. Adding in the long name of a newspaper editor who served during the Korean War is ridiculous. NOBODY gave more for his country than Pat Tillman, and to water down his sacrifice by tossing in some LV hack when naming that bridge is a downright crime.

I think both Nevada and Arizona were allowed to pick somebody to name the bridge after. Since they both died in 2004, the year the project started, it was 'convenient' to choose Tillman and O'Callaghan. While I agree that Tillman has more of a 'sexy' story, O'Callaghan was the Governor of Nevada among other things--that's nothing to scoff at.

I remember when they were building the new bridge over the Charles for the 'Big Dig' while I lived in Boston. The Townies in Charlestown were very much against the Boston liberals naming the bridge after a left-wing, civil rights activist. It was a huge controversey. They eventually settled on The Leonard P. Zakim Bunker Hill Bridge as a compromise.

I wonder on the Hoover bridge how they decided whose name would be first. I assume it's alphabetical.

I also have bridgeophobia. But I will cross a bridge if forced or if it's necessary. The wave of anxiety is overpowering, and a little thrilling. From your pictures, it looks like you could lean over the railing of the bridge while you were crossing it. That must have been terrifying.

Thanks for all the comments. Good catch about the water level in the postcards. Here is a side by side look.

My picture


Postcard


About the name. I have not heard it discussed much among locals. However, I suspect there is no consensus yet. If you asked 100 adult locals I would set the line at the number would know the correct name at 1.5, and the under would be favored.

I looked it up, and the proper term for fear of bridges is gephyrophobia. Those who suffer from that should be advised if hiking to Phanton Ranch in the Grand Canyon along the Kiabob trial that the bridge that crosses the Colorado is a steal grate with grids so big you could drop a golf ball through. I have a picture of it somewhere. Mules have to walk up the river to another wooden bridge, because they won't touch the metal-grate bridge.

About traffic, it was fast when I was there. No problem at all. There was a flashing sign warning of delays, but I think it was referring to a point on the 93 well into Arizona.

Yes, you can still drive over the dam. There is free parking on the Arizona side, so there is a legitimate reason to.

I didn't want to write this in the article, but think if you're going to commit suicide by jumping, this bridge would be a very convenient choice. It would be easy to jump over the wall, the scenery is outstanding, and there ain't no way you could survive. There is a small percentage of Golden Gate bridge jumpers who survive. I think the shallow water below this bridge would be fatal in the unlikely event the initial impact wasn't. I predict there will be jumpers in the future, and in response a fence will be constructed, obscuring the view. Enjoy the unobstructed views now, while you can.

Thanks for all the corrections.

Thanks for the writeup, Wizard. You were quite correct in your advice to delay a dam visit until the bridge was finished. I have visited the dam several times, but on my last two attempts, I gave up completely and turned back to Las Vegas. The mid-day traffic jam was just overwhelming both times.

My wife and I will be back in your town during the "dead" period of mid-December, and I plan to visit the bridge and dam then. Your photos have actually helped in planning the timing of a visit. While the photos of the dam with the shadow of the bridge may be dramatic, I think I personally prefer a view of the dam on its own.

I believe the view of the bridge from the middle of the dam is toward the southwest. Thus, I think I will plan to visit the dam in the (late) morning (before the sun gets behind the bridge causing the problems you encountered in your photos) then visit the bridge in the early afternoon, after the sun is fully on the face of the dam but before the shadow of the bridge reaches the dam. I rather suspect that with your interest in solar eclipses you could tell me the optimal hours to achieve these objectives (or tell me that I need to wait for a different season), but I expect that I will just wing it, the way I do at a crap table.

Quote: Doc

I believe the view of the bridge from the middle of the dam is toward the southwest. Thus, I think I will plan to visit the dam in the (late) morning (before the sun gets behind the bridge causing the problems you encountered in your photos) then visit the bridge in the early afternoon, after the sun is fully on the face of the dam but before the shadow of the bridge reaches the dam.

I'm by no means a good amateur astronomer. I can never keep straight which is a weaning and waxing moon, for example. However, I agree that for picture purposes, I would visit in the early morning. The shadow of the bridge should be cast well on the Nevada side of the dam. I intended to visit in the morning myself, but then a dinner was scheduled with a friend was planned, so I scheduled my whole day around that. Then, when I was done with the bridge and dam, he flaked on the dinner because he had Chinese food leftovers to eat. Ugh!!!

Quote:

About the name. I have not heard it discussed much among locals. However, I suspect there is no consensus yet. If you asked 100 adult locals I would set the line at the number would know the correct name at 1.5, and the under would be favored.

For the purposes of science I intend to ask several people one my upcoming trip to Vegas to name the bridge and see what they say :)

Quote: Wizard

I can never keep straight which is a weaning and waxing moon, for example.

Just think of the root words:

Wean, as in to wean off of something. It's from full moon to new, when it seems like someone is taking a slice of the moon every day.
Wax, as in applying wax to make a candle. It's from new moon to full as the moon gets fatter.

I used to have the same problem with concave and convex. Concave, has 'cave' in the word, so think of a cave. Or at least a shallow cave that might look like a bowl. So now I can remember concave. Convex is the other one...

Quote: Wizard

... but then a dinner was scheduled with a friend ... he flaked on the dinner because he had Chinese food leftovers to eat. Ugh!!!

Always remember, and never forget: People suck.

I have even more respect for Pat Tillman (which was pretty high, as giving up a NFL career to join the military and fight in Afghanistan takes a lot of courage and respect) on reading that he was not only an atheist/agnostic, he was also not in favor of the Iraq war. To go fight for something you believe in fighting for, to maintain a level of critical review of your government while fighting for them and to be an atheist in the foxhole makes him a far better man than I.

Isn't it waxing and -waning-?

Quote: Wizard

I can never keep straight which is a weaning and waxing moon, for example.

A "weaning" moon is one that is trying to give up suckling.


Edit: Well dang, Wizard. We all sure jumped on you at the same time for that typo!

Quote: thecesspit

Isn't it waxing and -waning-?

Admin note: removed image www.djteddybear.com/images/homer_doh.jpg

...but I had the waxing part right. I forget how to remember the waning part.

Quote: Doc

A "weaning" moon is one that is trying to give up suckling.


Edit: Well dang, Wizard. We all sure jumped on you at the same time for that typo!

Talking of which, Mr Wizard, you have an error in the article in the sentence where you talk about the barrier on the Arizona side... the sentence doesn't quite follow.

Quote: thecesspit

For the purposes of science I intend to ask several people one my upcoming trip to Vegas to name the bridge and see what they say :)

Please do, and let us know the results. I'd lay long odds nobody knows the correct name. As was noted in a recent study, Vegas is the dumbest major city in America.

Quote: Doc

A "weaning" moon is one that is trying to give up suckling.

Good one; I deserve it.

"I didn't want to write this in the article, but think if you're going to commit suicide by jumping, this bridge would be a very convenient choice. It would be easy to jump over the wall, the scenery is outstanding, and there ain't no way you could survive. There is a small percentage of Golden Gate bridge jumpers who survive. I think the shallow water below this bridge would be fatal in the unlikely event the initial impact wasn't."

That comment's just absolutely BEGGING for an essay from mkl! When I saw your pictures I sent a comment to my wife because we're going over it tomorrow and again Sunday. What I said was "no jumpers yet, but there WILL be". What's the line on that one?

Quote: JerryLogan

... What's the line on that one?

Bungee.

Quote: Doc

Bungee.

Funny....but I'm betting it's some video-poker-playing advantage player who just didn't realize that all-important 3 tenths of a percent like Dan Paymar promised.

Quote: JerryLogan

"I didn't want to write this in the article, but think if you're going to commit suicide by jumping, this bridge would be a very convenient choice. It would be easy to jump over the wall, the scenery is outstanding, and there ain't no way you could survive. There is a small percentage of Golden Gate bridge jumpers who survive. I think the shallow water below this bridge would be fatal in the unlikely event the initial impact wasn't."

That comment's just absolutely BEGGING for an essay from mkl! When I saw your pictures I sent a comment to my wife because we're going over it tomorrow and again Sunday. What I said was "no jumpers yet, but there WILL be". What's the line on that one?

You're jumping off the bridge tomorrow? Yay!

Quote: mkl654321

You're jumping off the bridge tomorrow? Yay!

Well, if I were a teacher that made $26,000/yr, I might think about it.

Quote: JerryLogan

That comment's just absolutely BEGGING for an essay from mkl! When I saw your pictures I sent a comment to my wife because we're going over it tomorrow and again Sunday. What I said was "no jumpers yet, but there WILL be". What's the line on that one?

I'll bet on almost anything, but that is too morbid to wager one. However, just for the sake of argument, I set the line at the first jump as before/after 1/1/11.

Enjoy the bridge visit.

Quote: JerryLogan

Well, if I were a teacher that made $26,000/yr, I might think about it.

I would, too. That would mean I just got a $29,000/yr pay cut.

Quote: mkl654321

I would, too. That would mean I just got a $29,000/yr pay cut.

I was trying to be funny. But what's REALLY funny is you think $55,000 is a respectable wage in this day and age. No wonder you live a virtual life here.

Quote: JerryLogan

I was trying to be funny. But what's REALLY funny is you think $55,000 is a respectable wage in this day and age. No wonder you live a virtual life here.

We established in threads passim that your wage is in the top 2% of the country. 55k/pa is around (if not above) the average US wage.

It's certainly above the average Canadian wage.

Still, the US dollar is now worth less than a Canadian dollar, so I pity my poorer southern friends. (Damn it crossed back below again...)

Quote: JerryLogan

I was trying to be funny. But what's REALLY funny is you think $55,000 is a respectable wage in this day and age. No wonder you live a virtual life here.

You would use whatever number I said as an excuse to make an asshole comment: if it was above a certain amount, you would have called me a liar, if below a certain amount, you would make some kind of snide douchebag remark like you just did.

As another poster pointed out, 55K/year is above the average American yearly wage. I also have a pretty good health care plan, and retirement benefits. So you're, as usual, completely full of shit. And I, unlike you, don't blow tens of thousands a year playing bad video poker, so I probably have much more money than you at the end of the year. It's not how much you make, it's how much you keep.

Now go ahead, you prick, say something else snotty, for the sole purpose of behaving like the worthless, abrasive, ignorant crapsack you are.

This thread started out discussing the new by-pass bridge, got diverted onto various topics such as the load the water imposes on a dam, and eventually turned nasty as many threads have done in the past few months. It has been dormant for a month and a half, but I am resurrecting it as an appropriate thread in which to post some comments about my recent visit to Las Vegas. Actually, I think I will cover several topics here, so I will both return to topic and divert in the same post!

This past week when I had the opportunity to dine with the Wizard, I mentioned that I had finally made it back out to the dam (attempted visits in January and April were aborted due to traffic jams) and got to walk on the bridge. He said that after writing his article about the new bridge, he had subsequently taken some friends for a visit. They had encountered parking problems at the bridge visitors' lot, so he asked that I post a write-up of my visit.

In the Wizard's article, he mentioned that while there is an admission charge ($7) for parking in the deck at the dam, there is free parking on the Arizona side. Being a cheapskate, I gave that a try. It turns out that the very first parking area on the Arizona side had a sign saying that parking cost $7. I didn't see anyone there collecting money, but they may have appeared if someone pulled in. There were some cars parked in that area. There are at least three more parking areas, progressively further up the hill on the Arizona side, and they were heavily in use when I got there, about noon on a Tuesday. A car was pulling out just as I arrived, so I had no difficulty, but there may have been a bit of luck there. I don't know that everyone willing to walk down and up the hill will have the option of parking for free.

I took a few pictures of the bridge from the dam and present one of them below. It is similar to the one in the Wizard's article except that I picked a more opportune time of day and avoided the lens flare. Not a very attractive sky as background, though.



My wife asked how this bridge compares to the New River Gorge Bridge in West Virginia, which we have visited a few times. I did not know, so I looked it up on that most reliable source: Wikipedia. Naturally, the articles there have some ambiguity, but I will post what they claim for height, length, and span. I also include the data for the Royal Gorge Bridge in Arkansas, even though it is only a pedestrian bridge.

	Mike O'Callaghan-Pat Tillman Memorial	New River Gorge	Royal Gorge
Height	840 ft or 900 ft	876 ft	955 ft
Length	1,900 ft	3,030 ft	1,260 ft
Span	1,080 ft	1,700 ft	938 ft

Yes, the Wikipedia article lists two different heights for the new bridge. In any case, each bridge presents at least some basis for a claim that it exceeds the others.

Of course, I also wanted to walk the bridge for a view of Hoover Dam I had never before seen, except in photos such as the ones the Wizard presented in his article. Here is one of the photos that I took.



The parking deck is visible on the left edge of the photo at about the same level as the top of the dam. The free-to-look-for-a-space lots are visible near the right edge and higher than the dam. It's an easy walk down to the dam from there, but I can verify that fat guys can feel the burn if they climb the stairway back up to the lot. There is also a more gradual climb available if you follow the walkway on the side of the road.

Speaking of stairs, walkways, and parking lots, this final photo shows the parking lot for walking up to the bridge. The Wizard said this lot was completely full on his second visit and he had to park in the dirt lot across the highway. The Tuesday we visited, the paved lot was crowded, as you may see, but I think most everyone found a spot. The only vehicle I saw parked across the road was a tour bus that had dropped off its passengers and parked over there. There is both a stairway and a ramp up the hill to the bridge. We chose to follow the ramp up and the stairs down. Most visitors while we were there took the stairs both ways.



I suppose that this is as good a place as any to acknowledge that I fell victim to the Wizard's skill at stump-the-waiter trivia wagers. He proposed a couple of trivia questions we could pose to our waiter, but for the first several we both chose the same side of the wager. Finally, he suggested the question "What was the name of Popeye's girlfriend?" At that moment, I wished I had paid closer attention to the waiter: I remembered him as being young enough that he might not know that one, while the Wizard believed he would get it right. I requested that we alter the question to require that he be able to spell the girlfriend's name, but the Wizard would not accept that condition, so we went with the original version. The Wizard posed the question; the waiter grimaced a little, came up with "Olive" and was trying to come up with the rest of the name when the lady at the next booth shouted, "Olive Oyl!". The Wizard's immediate reaction was to declare audience interference, then he asked the waiter whether he would have been able to come up with the answer. The waiter mumbled a low-confidence-level affirmative and left. The Wizard offer to call it a no-bet, but I responded to concede the wager. He said he would give me a chance to win back my $1, but we never came up with another trivia question for which we did not choose the same side.

I mention this trivia wager in this thread because the Wizard once posted that he thought it would be a good trivia question to pose to a waiter or cocktail waitress to give the full correct name of the new bridge. With this in mind, I suggested three additional trivia questions that the Wizard might use some day.

#1. "What is the correct spelling of the name of the new bridge?" The Wizard missed this one on first try but quickly came up with the correct answer.

#2. "What were the sports in which these two men were proficient?" The Wizard knew what sport Pat Tillman played (and I would expect most people to get that part right), but he did not know of Mike O'Callaghan's sports participation prior to his war injury nor his sports teaching afterward. I would not be surprised if he found the opportunity to use this trivia question on others some day.

#3. "What name was used for this bridge prior to it being named for O'Callaghan and Tillman?" The Wizard did not know the answer to this one either, and when I told him the answer, he didn't consider it a good question/answer, even though the original name is used extensively in the signage along the walkway to the bridge.

Anyway, here's my warning that you should learn the answers to these before entering one-on-one trivia competition with the Wizard. :-)

It appears that the traffic bottleneck has moved up the road a bit, into the 2-lane section of road above the dam and up the hill into Boulder City.

http://www.lvrj.com/news/rtc-wants-law-to-temporarily-ban-tractor-trailers-on-dam-bypass-112620689.html

Thanks Doc for the nice article. Here are a few comments.

1. You're right that the first lot you get to on the Arizona side costs $7. If you drive past it, the higher lots are free. However, if you're short on time, or don't want to walk up and down a lot of stairs, I'd suggest not being cheap like me and cough up the $7 for the Nevada parking garage. I have seen parking lot attendants reading paperback books most of the time in the $7 Arizona lot. I should rewrite my article to mention that information.

2. Good retelling of the trivia. That isn't the first time the audience has interfered with such bets. Recently I was having dinner and we bet on whether an adult at another table could name Dora the Explorer's monkey. A girl, about the age of five, overheard the question and said enthusiastically BOOTS!!!

3. I drove to Lake Havasu last Monday and there was a traffic backup starting about a mile before the Railroad Pass. I would heed that advice in the article quoted in the last post and avoid the dam/bridge on weekends and holidays.

Quote: LVRJ article cited above

For more than a decade, city officials have pushed the state and federal government for a bypass that would stream traffic around the city along a continuous four-lane highway.

The project was stalled by a combination of strong opposition and a lack of funding.

I can understand "lack of funding", but I really don't understand who provided "strong opposition" to the proposed city-bypass project. Any locals have info on this?