November 07, 2005
Monday

I totally agree with Mr.Rettke's opinion, and wonder why this idea has not been presented and considered along the way? Why not spend the allocated bridge monies on a third way out of town, via a road and a bridge to the mainland?

"That third way could bring in more jobs and business than anything else I've heard bandied about lately. A road to the mainland would be expensive, but it would open up more public lands to the public for viewing and enjoying. It would open up ways for business to expand and grow. It would enhance the tourism industry in ways that we haven't seen yet. In the end that third way into and out of town would probably bring in more jobs than the forty alleged ones the bridge will ever do. And, we'd still have the ferry workers on the payroll too"; (Mr. Rettke).

Simple, yet ingenious: a road across the island; a bridge across the canal; and a continued road to Hyder/Stewart, and voila, a way for us to actually DRIVE out!!

My question is, since allocated monies are already there (?), is there some possible way to actually propose such an idea in lieu of the Gravina bridge?

Sharon Fraley
Ketchikan, AK - USA

On the Web:

Gravina Access (Includes studies, public comments, etc.)
www.gravina-access.com

Related Viewpoint:

A road and bridge needed, but not to Gravina By David Rettke - Ketchikan, AK - USA

 

Write a Letter -------Read Letters

E-mail the Editor

Sitnews
Stories In The News
Ketchikan, Alaska