MidtownCoog Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Bridge may shatter budget Some say soaring costs put Calatrava's 3rd Trinity span in peril 08:30 AM CST on Friday, March 31, 2006By EMILY RAMSHAW / The Dallas Morning News Construction costs for the first of three much-heralded bridges to span the Trinity River could reach $100 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallasite Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Only in Dallas do you see something built for vanity's sake.Exactly. This type of thing only happens in Dallas. Thank goodness you don't let anyone forget how much you hate Dallas. It is really refeshing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted March 31, 2006 Author Share Posted March 31, 2006 I love Dallas. But you can't make stories like this one up.Check the DMN "reader comments" on this story. Even Dallasites are up in arms. But you failed to answer my question:Exactly how are these bridges supposed to re-invigorate Dallas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Only in Dallas do you see something built for vanity's sake. Exactly how are these bridges supposed to re-invigorate Dallas?On the contrary, you can hardly single out Dallas for civic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted March 31, 2006 Author Share Posted March 31, 2006 It's still a bridge. Larua Miller says it will re-stimulate South Dallas.How?Charles Bridge in Prague and Tower Bridge in London are two of my faves. But they carry a good amount of pedestrians. Are the Dallas bridges for pedestrians, autos, or both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 I think it's a bit of a stretch to claim that the bridges will re-stimulate South Dallas, but city officials always claim developmental benefits from civic improvements. Much the same as the claim here that the new downtown park will stimulate development. It might, but in both cases there's a degree of wishful thinking going on. As I said, the real rationale is image-building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted March 31, 2006 Author Share Posted March 31, 2006 Much the same as the claim here that the new downtown park will stimulate development. I must have missed that press release. I heard Mayor White say it would be a crowel jewl, or something like that, but never that he was building this park to spur development.Creating a park to supr development is quite the oxymoron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 I must have missed that press release. I heard Mayor White say it would be a crowel jewl, or something like that, but never that he was building this park to spur development.Creating a park to supr development is quite the oxymoron.He actually wants both. He wants a vibrant urban park downtown, and hopes that it will spur development of the east side of DT into residential and retail surrounding the park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted March 31, 2006 Author Share Posted March 31, 2006 If I were mayor, I think I'd have thrown my millions at "Midtown Green."Talk about needing residental and retail development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesternGulf Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 If I am not mistaken, this bridge will be in the center of Dallas' Trinity River Urban Development. No need for it to be packed with pedestrians now, but eventually it might. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 If I am not mistaken, this bridge will be in the center of Dallas' Trinity River Urban Development. No need for it to be packed with pedestrians now, but eventually it might.They are freeway bridges. Walking on the freeway is illegal. How much fun it would be to walk on a Calatrava with semis from the Port of Dallas blowing by at 70 mph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesternGulf Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 They are freeway bridges. Walking on the freeway is illegal. How much fun it would be to walk on a Calatrava with semis from the Port of Dallas blowing by at 70 mph. Oh. I thought the bridges were for autos and pedestrians. It looks as if there are peds on one of the bridges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted March 31, 2006 Author Share Posted March 31, 2006 I think I can see HMS Laura Miller under the first bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Bridge 1: IH30 Bridge: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesternGulf Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Here are some renderings of what is suppose to come out of all this. Fort Worth's Trinity River plan is highly impressive. (Not pictured here) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted March 31, 2006 Author Share Posted March 31, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 That last one is outside Houston. On the face of it, those renderings make the Trinity River look similar to Houston's Buffalo Bayou plan. So my question is, what is the likelihood of the elements of this plan taking place as envisioned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonDFW Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Only in Dallas do you see something built for vanity's sake.What a load of BS. You know I heard there are people in Dallas that water their lawns just so they'll look better! You might want to get right on that, surely it deserves a new thread!Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted March 31, 2006 Author Share Posted March 31, 2006 Read the DMS reader comments. See how happy folks are about these bridges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VelvetJ Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 On the contrary, you can hardly single out Dallas for civic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted March 31, 2006 Author Share Posted March 31, 2006 cities have used great architecture to advertise their power and wealth.That's just it. Looks like there won't be any money left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonDFW Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Read the DMS reader comments. See how happy folks are about these bridges.Some great quotes in there like:"Now it looks as if a new stadium would have helped fund these new, expensive, sure-to-be-underutilized bridges."So the new stadium built in 2009 was going to fund these bridges? Yeah right! The comments in that section look no different than the comments about the "future" light rail lines, the red and blue.The private sector picked up the tab for the design improvements to the bridge, if people give them a chance they will probably pick up much of the materials overrun costs which seem to be affecting *everything* these days.jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montrose1100 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Building a "big & pretty" bridge could mean all the difference. After all, a city with a symbolic Bridge has a greater image. But I don't understand the river developement, where will all that water come from? Isn't the Trinity usually "dried up" most of the year? Are they going to divert water from somewhere else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonDFW Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 But I don't understand the river developement, where will all that water come from? Isn't the Trinity usually "dried up" most of the year?The part that is dry in your image is the floodway, and isn't supposed to be wet. The main channel flows well even in droughts in my experience. Smaller water sources fill MUCH bigger lakes around the DFW area. Even during 2005, which actually matched the worst years of the dust bowl era in several ways, there were several area lakes which really weren't affected that much, and in one big rain were basically full.Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallascaper Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 But I don't understand the river developement, where will all that water come from? Isn't the Trinity usually "dried up" most of the year?Are they going to divert water from somewhere else?Yes, the water for the "lakes" (big ponds, IMO) will not come directly from the Trinity, but will be piped in from Lake Lewisville. The plan is for a new Trinity channel to be placed on the south side (I think) of the floodplain, which will make room for the lakes.In my opinion, the Trinity plan is interesting, but it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Building a "big & pretty" bridge could mean all the difference. After all, a city with a symbolic Bridge has a greater image. Very true. The biggest routist attraction in Rotterdam is the Erasmusbrug. Redding, California has seen a spike in tourism since it opened its Sundial Bridge last year. And don't forget one of the most famous bridges in the world: ...and the other: Right now, Chicago is holding a contest to replace five or six pedestrian bridges over Lake Shore Drive with fancy new ones. Part of the requirement is that they must be visually stunning. You can see the finalists here. Bottom line: It's not a waste of money to turn infrastructure into a work of art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaphod Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 cool! is that a high dive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 I think Baton Rouge has one like that, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaphod Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 I think Baton Rouge has one like that, too. Nice. They will come in handy for ninjas who want to jump onto the sailboats seen the pic as well okay, anyways, i think one bridge would do and having a lake(even though swimming in it might be a stretch),but that seems like a waste to build 3 ugly designer bridges over a fake lake when some places dont even have enough money to fix their roads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 Nice. They will come in handy for ninjas who want to jump onto the sailboats seen the pic as well okay, anyways, i think one bridge would do and having a lake(even though swimming in it might be a stretch),but that seems like a waste to build 3 ugly designer bridges over a fake lake when some places dont even have enough money to fix their roads That kind of thinking is what filled the Communist Bloc with row after row of identical, faceless, ugly concrete apartment blocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.