Comments on: Progress Wins One at Harrods Creek

By: Pelican Power

Pelican Power — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 03:31:42 +0000

Riverfields has accomplished very some good things over the years. On this issue the organization has lost their sense of reason and safety. Thank goodness this is a cause they will lose. I wish them good luck in the future when they make better decisions concernign future issues with the roadway.

By: Mark H (Not Hebert)

Mark H (Not Hebert) — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 15:54:22 +0000

Unfortunately, this whole impact of this situation could have been mitigated if egos had been held in check.

Riverfields was going to make a power play against the city and Jerry decided he would show them by having the bridge condemned and shut down. By condemning the bridge before the funding, design, and environmental impact statement was completed, he shut Riverfields down and simultaneously screwed the residents and businesses. Not that I can blame him, but once the bridge was condemned, the State DOT engineer would not go out on limb to overturn the condemnation notice.

So everyone has waiting and both egos can claim victory.

By: Carter Burger

Carter Burger — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:36:14 +0000

What’s to keep the city, or county, from going to River Fields and saying “You don’t like the way we are doing it fine, YOU do it. just have the road back open by December”.

By: justamule

justamule — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:27:49 +0000

“River Fields…is now looked at as an obstructionist group”.

Well stated!

By: MTB

MTB — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:41:07 +0000

Maybe finally everyone will realize that Riverfields isn’t a protector of the city, but a group of know it all rich people, that are only concerned about their property and hold on power. The community and local leaders need to re-evaluate Riverfields’ involvement in the bridges project and give 8664 some real consideration.

By: tf42

tf42 — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 17:36:31 +0000

Mimi’s never had any consideration for anyone , except for what She Wants! She is one “big ” Busy Body!
The business operators should sue her for interfering.River Fields while doing good at one time is now looked at as an obstructionist group.

By: Mark H (Not Hebert)

Mark H (Not Hebert) — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:22:55 +0000

As a resident of Prospect, I am thrilled that we are finally moving to resolution. While wealthy individuals like Mimi have done a great deal to preserve valuable assets in the community, their wealth sometimes clouds their judgment when it comes to the economic and safety concerns.

I agree that the single lane bridge was quaint and gave the area some unique character, but a cost benefit analysis easily showed that a two lane bridge was necessary as a replacement.

No skin off Mimi’s back if the businesses along River Road go bankrupt during the fight, or as was seen after the fatal wreck in US 42 cut off the only efficient route in and out of the Prospect, the fight creates a safety issue.

I guess quaintness has a lot more value when you’re wealthy and unaffected.

By: Steve Magruder (I, not D or R)

Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:28:52 +0000

Sometimes progress means retaining the historic in building anew. Much of the character of the existing bridge can be retained in expanding it, clearly. This is ultimately a utilitarian issue.

River Fields presents itself as a preservation organization, but it seems to me that when this effort is combined with their twilight effort to stop the East End bridge, the conclusion I draw is that they oppose transportation efficiency due to some odd strain of NIMBYism.