Page 17 of 25 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 246

Thread: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

  1. #161
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Ouagoudougou, Burkina Faso
    Posts
    11,941

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    Quote Originally Posted by Da Bison View Post
    I think you have your decimal point in the wrong place

    It's a lot closer to $2million/mile. So that would be $200m plus acquisition costs and the ditch cost which would share the ROW with the interstate.
    One of the roads should be labeled I-129 and the other I-329 N/S are odd #'s
    Sub-Interstates that loop around a city all start with an even digit. Hence 694/494 in the Cities, cause it's a loop. 394 is a spur, so it starts with an odd number.

    I picked 429, because it was available. There's a 294 in Chicago, 229 in Soo Foo, 494 and 694 are taken already, and I think Kansas City has a 629, though I'm not sure.
    "Jfufhr dhuis msdjdi asdj."
    - Lou Holtz

  2. #162
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    your mom
    Posts
    7,552

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    If they say 1.78 billion after adding hcikson bakke addition and oxbow into the buyouts fornthe diversion it's gonna end up being 4 billion!
    One question I'd have and maybe it's been addressed is what happens to kindred schooled district that has to be a big part of there tax base?
    TRUST THE PROCESS

  3. #163
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Quahog, RI
    Posts
    18,973

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    Quote Originally Posted by unbison View Post
    If they say 1.78 billion after adding hcikson bakke addition and oxbow into the buyouts fornthe diversion it's gonna end up being 4 billion!
    One question I'd have and maybe it's been addressed is what happens to kindred schooled district that has to be a big part of there tax base?
    Hows the Dike work going??? been out of town for several weeks you guys staying busy?
    NDSU Athletics: oderint dum metuant


  4. #164
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    your mom
    Posts
    7,552

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    Tbagging the north end
    TRUST THE PROCESS

  5. #165
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    147

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBisonator View Post
    Sub-Interstates that loop around a city all start with an even digit. Hence 694/494 in the Cities, cause it's a loop. 394 is a spur, so it starts with an odd number.

    I picked 429, because it was available. There's a 294 in Chicago, 229 in Soo Foo, 494 and 694 are taken already, and I think Kansas City has a 629, though I'm not sure.
    Keep in mind, as long as it's in another state, you are allowed to reuse interstate loop/spur numbers... so we could, in essence have a 494 in Fargo.

    Though, I'm actually thinking we should just combine the numbers 29 and 94 and just call it 294.

  6. #166
    stevdock is offline Senior Member Gets their mail at the West Parking Lot
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    4,061

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    Some of you that are smarter than me, please explain how it makes sense to spend 1.8 billion or whatever it is on a diversion when the city of Fargo plans to protect the entire city to 42.5 feet for 109 million??

    http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/320024/

    Yes it would protect people outside of town from current flooding issues, and it would protect Fargo from overland flooding, but if the city can be protected for a fraction of the cost, then this diversion needs to be dropped IMMEDIATELY.

  7. #167
    ISXBISON's Avatar
    ISXBISON is offline Senior Member Gets their mail at the West Parking Lot
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,036

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    Quote Originally Posted by stevdock View Post
    Some of you that are smarter than me, please explain how it makes sense to spend 1.8 billion or whatever it is on a diversion when the city of Fargo plans to protect the entire city to 42.5 feet for 109 million??

    http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/320024/

    Yes it would protect people outside of town from current flooding issues, and it would protect Fargo from overland flooding, but if the city can be protected for a fraction of the cost, then this diversion needs to be dropped IMMEDIATELY.

    I believe they are moving forward with the thoughts of the diversion possibly not happening.

  8. #168
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Fargo
    Posts
    15,826

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    The smaller projects going on currently in Fargo to the 42.5 level won't protect the city against the mega flood that the diversion would. Even if the diversion happens (which is a long shot IMO), it will take a long time to construct. With the current wet weather cycle, I'm glad the city isn't just sitting back and waiting to see if the diversion is going to happen or not.

    533 In a row

  9. #169
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Funkytown
    Posts
    14,153

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    I'm just glad that I get to pay the same amount or more than Fargo property owners for their protection due to the sales tax levy.

    Fargo is such lame-ass town, can't even pay its own way.
    Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."
    Scrooge-"Are there no prisons?". "Plenty of prisons..."
    Scrooge-"And the Union workhouses." . "Are they still in operation?". "Both very busy, sir..."
    "Those who are badly off must go there."
    "Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
    Scrooge- "If they would rather die," "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."

  10. #170
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    NYC and Bucks County, PA
    Posts
    24,838

    Default Re: Flood Control: Diversion--ND or MN?

    Quote Originally Posted by NDB2 View Post
    I'm just glad that I get to pay the same amount or more than Fargo property owners for their protection due to the sales tax levy.

    Fargo is such lame-ass town, can't even pay its own way.
    Or you could argue that the thousands of people who live outside Fargo but work there aren't paying their way.

    I doubt that a diversion will ever get built because it is too damn expensive so you don't have to worry... unless those dikes fail.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •