TRP: The Trinity River Spans

[barrycb]

I like that much better than the Woodall Rogers rendering.

[Hunter Wadle]

Great, NOW BUILD IT!
-THEY NEED TO START CONSTRUCION

[boozo]

No, I think that is just the same ol' picture that has been up there forever (meaning it is the 3D artist's idea of what the bridge will look like) and that was based on the conceptual images from years ago.

After the last bridge changed so dramatically, I am ready for something different again this time.

Curiously, when I was in City Hall looking at the model crate, it seemed much wider the the tall case for the Woodall Rogers bridge, but then again, I don't know how a bridge model is shipped so it could be on it's side or something.

The lady said it would be revealed in October for sure.

[drumguy8800]

I'm pretty sure LM said that they were going to start construction in early (February?) 2005, but don't take my word on it. Was the Woodall Rogers bridge the one with that would resemble a hyperbola, had it been squished? Like, at the apex of both, it met, then curved down at an angle to the bottoms below? I think I prefered that design.. but if we're going to have an assortment of designs (I had always envisioned (5?) identical signature bridges).. that would be great. If they are going to have them all identical, I wonder why the design for the bridges was changed. I'm assuming that this design would be more cost-effective, because the masting would be vertical instead of angular, and would require a shallower base (I think, if I'm picturing it right..)

[drumguy8800]

Are these bridges supposed to be like.. steel painted white? Or maybe they aren't supposed to be white.. I'm really confused as to the actual material used to make the bridge and what color its going to be, etc.

[Foucault]

That design is so worth millions of dollars.

I mean, what are we paying for? Name recognition? Do we want to be the city of gullibility?

[Lakewooder]

If Arlington passes the Jones Tax, I'm in favor of making this a toll bridge.

[drumguy8800]

That design is so worth millions of dollars.

I mean, what are we paying for? Name recognition? Do we want to be the city of gullibility?

I designed a Woodall Rogers one for a project freshman year.. it looked pretty cool. At least, a lot cooler than two sets of parabolas.

[rantanamo]

Both were supposed to start construction in Fall of next year. But I'm not sure if the funds for the I-30 bridge are there yet. Did something happen recently? And that rendering is new. The older rendering in the animation doesn't look like that.

[boozo]

The transportation bill that was about to expire has been extended to May 2005. Inside it are the funds for the I-30 bridge.

[drumguy8800]

I don't know if this is old or new.. but these renderings are simply astounding. I really like the promenade in the third rendering..

[Columbus Civil]

I like how the promenade is separated from downtown by the toll road.

[jsoto3]

I also like how they show levee-top roads with dense development built right up to them while the Corps of Engineers will not allow any roads to be built atop the levees.

[freewaytincan]

I also like how they show levee-top roads with dense development built right up to them while the Corps of Engineers will not allow any roads to be built atop the levees.

These are pretty old. The sarcasm, however, is quite fresh.

[jsoto3]

In doing a search for old photos of the original Trinity mudflats before conversion to industrial use, I came across this very interesting old editorial (1998) by Jim Schutze regarding the proposed Trinity River Project. While intuitively I know that the transportation component of the project is wrong, now I understand why the powers that be insist on it. All the pieces of the puzzle are connected by a tenuous, perhaps illigitimate, tangle of financial necessities. This isn't necessarily news to anyone, but it was interesting to learn the history of the project.

http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues.../feature2.html

[drumguy8800]

Trinity plan tangled up in politics

Money for bridge project on hold as Congress sorts out bill

09:17 PM CDT on Sunday, October 24, 2004

By EMILY RAMSHAW / The Dallas Morning News


In June, Dallas officials made a mad rush to Washington, D.C., imploring legislators to put differences aside and pass a federal transportation bill before the November election. But when Congress recessed this month, they left the reauthorization bill unfinished – and construction dollars for Dallas' Trinity River bridges tangled up in the mix. "It's deeply disappointing for the city of Dallas, the state of Texas and this country that we couldn't get past the partisan politics and complete this most important bill," City Council member Ed Oakley said. "There's so much that's not getting accomplished."Members of Congress will return to Washington in mid-November for a lame-duck session. But Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Dallas, said that if the bill doesn't pass then, all bets are off.

"It means we start from the beginning," Ms. Johnson said. The future of Dallas' Trinity River project depends on three bridges – monumental structures designed by world-renowned architect Santiago Calatrava. The first, the future Woodall Rodgers extension bridge, is fully financed. But the transportation bill is expected to fund the Interstate 30 bridge and the nearby Interstate 35E bridge, as well as two highway interchanges on Lyndon B. Johnson Freeway. Interim City Manager Mary Suhm said this was one item on the to-do list she was hoping to check off.

"I would've liked it to have passed, but it's not the end of the world," she said. "The good news is we still have a serious commitment from the Dallas delegation, and that plows the ground." But she said the extent to which this year's legislation is reconsidered will depend on whether control of the House or Senate changes. And the outcome of local elections – particularly among candidates pledging to allocate large sums to Dallas' projects – could play a role. In the 32nd Congressional District, two incumbents – Democratic Rep. Martin Frost and Republican Rep. Pete Sessions – are running against each other, a result of Texas redistricting. Both have earmarked funds for the project.

Of the two congressmen, Dallas Mayor Laura Miller said, Mr. Frost has allocated the "lion's share" of the money for the I-30 bridge. And she said if he doesn't win, she's worried about who will make up the remainder. "When you have two congressmen running against each other, only one is going to win," she said. Ms. Johnson said no matter who wins, funding the Trinity River bridges is going to become more difficult after the election. "We're going to lose one veteran," she said. "It will be a more complicated process, and it's likely to change."

Stalled out

In April, the House approved legislation to reauthorize the transportation bill, to the tune of $275 billion over the next six years. The Senate's version, which was approved in February, would provide $318 billion. The White House has threatened to veto any version of the bill that allocates more than $256 billion for transportation projects. The bill, which expired at the end of last year, was extended twice before this fall's extension. And city leaders say they can only hope when Congress picks up the legislation again, members will choose to tweak existing versions rather than start from scratch. "This has been very frustrating," said Mr. Oakley, who chairs the city's Trinity River committee. "We need them to continue to move forward."

Timeline

State Transportation Department officials say construction of an I-30 bridge should begin in late 2005 to address safety concerns, including capacity limits and road deterioration. Recent events make the schedule for the bridges "tighter and tougher," Ms. Suhm said. But Rebecca Dugger, the city's Trinity River project director, said as long as the bill passes by May – its most recent extension date – the city will still be on target for construction. In the meantime, she said, design plans will go "full speed ahead," even though construction funds still aren't set in stone.

'Not slowing down'

"We're not slowing down, we're not stopping anything," Ms. Dugger said. "We're going forward as if we had the money in hand." But Mr. Oakley said it's hard for projects to proceed with design, planning and review processes without a definite dollar figure for construction. And he said the city and the state Transportation Department have to keep funneling money into paving and repairs, when what they really need is to replace thoroughfares. "The lifeblood of this country is movement of goods, services and people," he said. "We will be OK. But this gives us pause." Ms. Dugger said the real question will be what to do if the bill doesn't pass in May. At that point, she said, the city would have to have some serious talks with the state. "We would have to regroup and see where we want to go," she said.

[drycreek]

I hope this fails. I am so against any additional roads between dt and the river that I would rather have nothing happen then an expensive highway project with some shoddy landscaping around it. I really, really want this to fail. Either do it right or don't do it at all. I seriously can't even think about this project and what it's turned into anymore because I become so frustrated.

[freewaytincan]

I hope this fails. I am so against any additional roads between dt and the river that I would rather have nothing happen then an expensive highway project with some shoddy landscaping around it. I really, really want this to fail. Either do it right or don't do it at all. I seriously can't even think about this project and what it's turned into anymore because I become so frustrated.

I agree. They've been at it for what, thirty or forty years now? And it's caught up in the politics again. How very shocking.

[TexasStar]

I hope this fails. I am so against any additional roads between dt and the river that I would rather have nothing happen then an expensive highway project with some shoddy landscaping around it. I really, really want this to fail. Either do it right or don't do it at all. I seriously can't even think about this project and what it's turned into anymore because I become so frustrated.

But, what you will most likely end up with is the roadway and nothing else.

[tamtagon]

I seriously can't even think about this project and what it's turned into anymore because I become so frustrated.

word

[freewaytincan]

But, what you will most likely end up with is the roadway and nothing else.

Sadly, you're probably right.

[mikedsjr]

Maybe they can place toll walkways in DTD to pay for the bridges. Every street can be a "pay to walk here" street where every block cost 45 cents. That will keep the homeless out at least.

[texman]

But, what you will most likely end up with is the roadway and nothing else.

I don't know TexasStar, I mean if you look at 75 reconstruction they didnt leave any of those"enhancement" elements out. Im confused though, what is tangled up in politics? The tollway or the briges or both? The article was talking about they bridges but yall are talking about the tollway..I'm lost. I sure hope they get the funding of the bridges and they said there gonna stay on schedual anyways but its hard "without the set dollar amount" or w/e the article said.

[gc]

I am sure all of you know, but Martin Frost's loss this evening could have significant negative impact on the Calatrava Bridge's funding. I hope Pete Sessions gets up to speed quick...

[freewaytincan]

I am sure all of you know, but Martin Frost's loss this evening could have significant negative impact on the Calatrava Bridge's funding. I hope Pete Sessions gets up to speed quick...

As do I. At least the V-22 Soldier Killer project will probably be shut down.

[gc]

Dear Congress
Dallas is telling a big, fat fib about the Trinity River project
BY JIM SCHUTZE - jimschutze@mindspring.com
http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues...src=newsletter

This is an open letter to U.S. Senators James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, John McCain of Arizona, Richard C. Shelby of Alabama and Christopher S. Bond of Missouri, and to U.S. Representative Don Young of Alaska and anyone else in Congress with an interest in the stalled surface transportation bill:


You are the targets of a fraud. You may think I'm naïve to bring it up. Maybe. But I still want to make sure you know. The fraud I'm talking about is being perpetrated by my hometown, Dallas. It's probably not a fraud in the criminal legal sense. But clearly and obviously it is a political fraud involving a lot more money than most criminal frauds. Buried in the money the Dallas delegation is seeking for the transportation improvements along the Trinity River in Dallas is $90 million to subsidize the replacement of three federal highway bridges over the Trinity. You have been told--and we taxpayers and citizens of Dallas have been told--that these bridges are officially slated for replacement because of their age and condition.

The official Web site of the city of Dallas Trinity River project tells the public here that the Texas Department of Transportation "identified the need to replace (the bridges) approximately four years ago, through their Bridge Inventory Inspection and Appraisal Program."

That is a lie.

The bridges are not slated for replacement.

I spent several weeks last August trying to get the Texas Department of Transportation to tell me whether any of these bridges was on its inventory of bridges needing replacement. The answer was long in coming. I don't know if that was because TxDOT knew this was going to be a sensitive issue in Dallas or if the public relations people helping me just had trouble getting a definitive answer from staff. The answer came eventually: No. None of these bridges is slated for replacement. One bridge, over Interstate 30, was recently rehabilitated and is in fine shape for the future. Two others, over Interstate 35, are nearing the point where they will need restoration--not replacement--after which they will be in great shape, too.

You in the Congress know how this works because you wrote the rules. People can't pull down federally funded bridges willy-nilly. There are criteria and procedures, measurements and calculations, all prescribed by law. If a bridge needs to be replaced, it goes on the legally required list of federal bridges needing replacement. If it doesn't need to be replaced, it doesn't go on the list. To say a bridge is on the list when it's not is to lie. I hate that word and use it reluctantly. Once an untruth has been promulgated as official policy, good people are bound by it. I raised the question again recently with Rebecca Dugger, the city employee who is director of the Trinity River Corridor Project.

I said: "I went through this with TxDOT a month ago. It took forever. I said, 'Show me the bridge inventories that say these bridges have to be replaced.' And they finally came back and said, 'They're not on the inventory for replacement.'"

Dugger said, "Right."

I said: "They're on for maintenance."

She said: "Right. I mean, that's the same thing they've told me."

But then Dugger offered me a tortured logic about how it might be a lot of maintenance, and anyway, the bridges might not be big enough. Those are different issues. The city tells its citizens and tells you that the bridges are on the list for replacement.

That's a lie.

Ah, I sense a sneer. Already. You are saying to yourself, "This clodhopper thinks things go by the rules. He doesn't get that the only rule is politics." But I do get that, in my own crudely parochial way. And I'm going to describe what I think the politics might be. Please let me finish first on the rules, however, because the rules will take us to the politics. The money you are being asked to give to Dallas is not to build any sort of normal or regular federal freeway bridges but for a series of so-called signature bridges over the Trinity River to be designed by the acclaimed Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava. These will be dramatic suspension bridges.

Somebody who works for you must have asked at some point why Dallas needed a series of dramatic suspension bridges over a narrow muddy span many casual visitors might not even recognize as a river. When the question was raised, I assume the answer was the same we have heard here in Dallas--that these bridges will "make a statement." Had you heard that? Did anybody inform you that Dallas wants to tear down all of the major freeway bridges downtown and replace them with suspension bridges--at two to three times the cost of normal pier-and-beam bridges--in order to make a statement?

And here's my first hint at what I think the politics might be: Exactly what kind of a statement would it make to tear down perfectly serviceable freeway bridges in a major American downtown and replace them with much more expensive decorative bridges? Do you personally want to be associated with that statement? Oh, gosh, I think I sense another sneer forming out there. You're saying to yourself, "Obviously there aren't enough morons in all America to actually tear down all the freeway bridges in a major city and replace them with Spanish suspension bridges just to 'make a statement.' So there's a real reason for it, and this ain't it."

Absolutely. Now we're getting somewhere.

The Trinity River project, to rebuild the river where it runs through the center of Dallas, has been billed as a flood-control project, a parks and recreation project, even a civil rights project (to unite the city and compensate for past environmental racism). I suspect you gentlemen will be unsurprised to learn that the Trinity River project is actually a road project. You've seen a few of those in your careers, haven't you?

This is a real estate scheme dating back to the late 1950s, centered on a "development road"--in this case a limited-access highway designed to bring traffic into what is now an aging, fully amortized, obsolete industrial and warehousing district. Some of the city's oldest and most entrenched land-holding interests and families, including the family that controls the city's only major daily newspaper, have holdings in the areas that would be enhanced by this project. What was that? I heard that. You just said to yourself, "Sounds like a fine project." Hey, wait a minute. Remember the rules. These are, after all, your rules. Since the early 1990s, your own rule for bankrolling road projects has been "congestion mitigation." You're not supposed to put federal tax dollars into a highway unless the highway will reduce traffic congestion.

This road, now called the "Trinity River Toll Road," is, like all development roads, designed to create traffic congestion. It's designed to bring traffic into a backwater area where drivers do not now especially want to go, in order to create business for the real estate developments the landholders hope to create. How can I prove that? In fact, there are stacks of traffic studies to show that this road does not meet congestion mitigation standards set by the federal government. But you don't have time for that, and I think we can cut to the chase a little anyway: Did you notice that you are not paying for this road? You are being asked to pay for a big chunk of the bridges over the road but not for the road itself.

The proposed Trinity River Toll Road is not a fully funded federal highway like the rest of the limited-access highways through downtown Dallas, because it doesn't meet federal traffic standards and therefore doesn't qualify for federal funds. The reason it doesn't meet those standards is because it does not reduce congestion. It creates congestion. It's a development road. What does that have to do with suspension bridges? Everything. This road project is for a multilane limited-access highway jammed on top of the flood-control berms or levees along the Trinity River. (By the way, the project also flies in the face of federal flood-control policy calling for less construction, not more, in floodways.)

In order to crowd a highway into this narrow space, along with some eyewash parks and a mini-lake or two, the city will have to reconfigure the river itself into multiple channels. The only way to get all of that done in the space available is to tear down the pier-and-beam bridges now carrying traffic over the river and replace them with suspension bridges. Without the suspension bridges, the rest of this Rube Goldberg design collapses. But the city can't admit that it needs new bridges in order to make the toll road project fly, because then the cost of the toll road would really go through the roof. The only way to rationalize tearing down the bridges--and perhaps provide you gentlemen with a fig leaf--is to lie and say the bridges have to come down anyway because they are decrepit.

I don't happen to think I'm totally naïve about the politics. I know there is sometimes a gap between the practical reality of public works projects and the broad pronouncements of official federal policy. But I ask this question of you: How often is the whole house of cards based on a central flat-out lie? Those bridges are not slated for demolition. If you give Dallas this money, you are doing one of two things. One: You are paying to tear down perfectly good bridges, in order to build very expensive suspension bridges, in order to facilitate a private development scheme. Or two: Maybe you prefer the explanation that says you wanted to tear down the bridges to "make a statement."

Now: You tell me about the politics of all that.

[rjlevins]

Oh shit it Schutze.

[texman]

Jeez, how nitpicky, "Oh the bridges don't need to be replaced blah blah", THATS NOT THE POINT, the point is to make the trinity river a park and make the bridge "signature" or whatever. Also there was report awhile back on all the news stations (channel 5 covered the story nicley) that bridges all over the state are in desperate need of replacing.

[drumguy8800]

The city of Dallas IS screwing the nation/texas/dallas over by putting a @#$@Ring highway in the middle of a park. But then again, why would they spend 1.2 billion out of the city's coffers to reep something like 20 million a year that would come from any development that sprang up around the road? That would take what, 60 years to pay off? Hmm.

[slfunk]

This article tries to describe a scenario that is opposite of what is happening. Sure the bridges are okay for now, what he forgets is when it comes to gov't funding they wait till it absoulutely has to be done. At that point the resolution is usually a lot more expensive and takes more time. He also forgets that the downtown highway interchanging system is severly behind the times. Anyone that has to drive through or near it can attest to that. About half the time on my way home I have to exit Central heading south in due to the back up to Mockingbird lane. So, my point is so what if the resolution is being pushed to include signature bridges and a new park (that is going to be very beneficial to the city). The citizens voted for the bonds for the Trinty River project, we are paying for it, we are asking for the US govt to return some of the money that is taken away from us to help improve our city and quality of life. The city of Dallas would not be the first city to do this.

His opinion is not very appreciated, and he does not speak for the majority voter in Dallas.

[texman]

This article tries to describe a scenario that is opposite of what is happening. Sure the bridges are okay for now, what he forgets is when it comes to gov't funding they wait till it absoulutely has to be done. At that point the resolution is usually a lot more expensive and takes more time. He also forgets that the downtown highway interchanging system is severly behind the times. Anyone that has to drive through or near it can attest to that. About half the time on my way home I have to exit Central heading south in due to the back up to Mockingbird lane. So, my point is so what if the resolution is being pushed to include signature bridges and a new park (that is going to be very beneficial to the city). The citizens voted for the bonds for the Trinty River project, we are paying for it, we are asking for the US govt to return some of the money that is taken away from us to help improve our city and quality of life. The city of Dallas would not be the first city to do this.

His opinion is not very appreciated, and he does not speak for the majority voter in Dallas.

Well said.

[Foucault]

Well, according to downtowndallas.org, a new signature design will be unveiled tomorrow.

[freewaytincan]

Well, according to downtowndallas.org, a new signature design will be unveiled tomorrow.

How much are these "signature designs" costing Dallas? Why can't they just pick one and go with it?

[Columbus Civil]

A bridge that looks like my signature would be wild.

[drumguy8800]

How much are these "signature designs" costing Dallas? Why can't they just pick one and go with it?

I think I've figured out Dallas' problem. We create problems by spending millions on plans to solve problems, and then go about what we were doing in the first place, basically ignoring the 'master plan!!!' we just spent millions on. erg.

[Lakewooder]

Design revealed for I-30 bridge

07:36 PM CST on Monday, November 15, 2004

From Staff Reports

Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava on Monday unveiled his design for a new Interstate 30 multi-lane bridge, the second of three signature bridges proposed to be constructed over the Trinity River.

<!-- image starts here --><!-- click icon starts here --> <!-- click icon ends here --> Courtesy
The completion of Calatrava's vision depends on public funding.

<!-- image ends here -->The bridges will be key components of the city's Trinity River corridor project.

Calatrava's design includes a center arch to rise 300 feet above the road deck and a 1,000-foot center span.

Design and construction is estimated at $130 million with funding provided by local citizens, Dallas County, and federal and state agencies. Work could begin as early as fall 2006 and be completed in 2009.

Calatrava already has unveiled the design for the Woodall Rodgers extension bridge, proposed to be built between Continental Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad. Construction could begin in late 2005 and be completed in 2008.

Dallas voters approved a record $246 million bond package six years ago to fund the Trinity River project. City staffers say the full project -- lakes, a parkway and the three bridges -- should be complete by late 2010 or early 2011.

[crescentboi]

I thought that was an old picture or is that the final design? I hope we don't get screwed over with funding issues and both of these bridges happen. It will forever change the face of the Western skyline viewing east, especially when you combine that with all that's happening in Victory and the Old Red clock tower. i'm sure there's gonna be visitors who won't even recognize Dallas if it's been years since they've been here.

[drumguy8800]

Meh, its the exact same. but 300 feet is pretty danged tall. 30 story building, plus however far it is from the roaddeck to the ground.

[Foucault]

May I refer you back to post no. 300...

Perhaps they're just saving the real design for printing tomorrow?

Edit: Never mind; I just saw a picture of Ed Oakley "unveiling" that design. I bet Mrs. McDermott's thrilled about this...

[tamtagon]

Does anyone know of a pic showing all the bridges? Maybe that will come tomorrow or later...?

[Mballar]

May I refer you back to post no. 300...

Perhaps they're just saving the real design for printing tomorrow?

They showed the actual unveiling on channels 8 and 5 during the 5 'oclock news today. From what I saw, posts 300 and 337 are acurate representations of the final version.

[crescentboi]

Design revealed for I-30 bridge

09:20 PM CST on Monday, November 15, 2004


By SCOTT CANTRELL / The Dallas Morning News



Four slender steel arches will carry Interstate 30 across the Trinity River if the Santiago Calatrava design displayed Monday at City Hall gets funded.


RICKY MOON/Special Contributor
Dallas council member Ed Oakley (right) answered questions at the unveiling of Santiago Calatrava's design for the new Interstate 30 bridge at City Hall on Monday morning. Mayor Laura Miller and members of the City Council unveiled a model of the proposed bridge, the second of three the acclaimed Spanish architect is designing for downtown Dallas. The design calls for 12 lanes of traffic, one being a reversible HOV lane. It also provides four "collector-distributor" lanes to be cantilevered outside the main bridge structure, but these would be added only in a later phase.

The 1,950-foot span would be entirely suspended from arches parallel to the roadway, without piers in the middle of the river. Besides giving a graceful look to a very broad bridge, the pier-less design wouldn't obstruct floodwaters. The two central arches would be longer and higher than the two on the outsides.

By contrast, Mr. Calatrava's previously unveiled design for a new Woodall Rodgers Freeway extension across the Trinity will have suspension cables torqued from a high, single arch spanning the road. Mr. Calatrava is also to design an Interstate 35E bridge.

"I tried to make each one of them fit the place and the function," Mr. Calatrava said Monday, "but also to have all three speak together, so they would become what we call a horizontal landmark."

Ms. Miller introduced Mr. Calatrava at the morning news conference, calling him "an extraordinarily hot architect at the moment." He's been particularly acclaimed for his recent addition to the Milwaukee Art Museum and his design for an underground transportation center at New York's Ground Zero. A Calatrava pedestrian bridge opened in July in Redding, Calif., but the Dallas bridges would be his first highway bridges in the United States.


Courtesy
The completion of Calatrava's vision depends on public funding. After thanking Dallas County and local philanthropist Margaret McDermott for funding the design of the I-30 bridge, Ms. Miller also urged people to contact their representatives in Congress to secure construction funds.

The I-30 bridge is one of many nationwide projects that are being delayed because the House and Senate haven't agreed on a federal transportation bill. The Senate approved a $318 billion reauthorization in February, but the House approved only $275 billion. The White House has threatened to veto any version of more than $256 billion. A lame-duck congressional session could deal with the problem as early as this week, or it could delay action until the next Congress. The Woodall Rodgers bridge is fully funded.

Meanwhile, the Texas Department of Transportation says the existing I-30 bridge, which is 50 years old and inadequate for current traffic, needs to be replaced. Rebecca Dugger, the city's Trinity River project director, said the new bridge design could be completed in early to mid-2006, with construction completed in 2010.

[texman]

DARN IT!! I always look forward to the paper in the morning but yall always post the news early. haha! I just won't read it..hmph.

[freewaytincan]

DARN IT!! I always look forward to the paper in the morning but yall always post the news early. haha! I just won't read it..hmph.

Yeah, I gave up sometime in early 2003 because of that.

[trolleygirl]

Looks like I was too late to post the unvieling...... I was at a meeting at the TRCP office last week and they had the models sitting there, so I did get a peek. I asked if I could take pics but they said they would unveil it this week. We were making fun of the model because it has glass mirrors where the Trinity River should be......yeah, that clear, shiny glass looks just like our Trinity River.

[St-T]

Maybe the 'urban lake' will be a bit clearer. haha

[js]

I am all for the new bridges. But what cracks me up is that is that suspension bridges were not made to look pretty, they have a function. Not only are we creating faux suspension bridges but the lake that it is going to cross. Forgive if I am wrong but I thought that bridges where built after there was a river or lake not before.

[slfunk]

I am all for the new bridges. But what cracks me up is that is that suspension bridges were not made to look pretty, they have a function. Not only are we creating faux suspension bridges but the lake that it is going to cross. Forgive if I am wrong but I thought that bridges where built after there was a river or lake not before.

I wouldnt worry about. Its an overall design. Know is going to think twice about once the development is completed.

[dallastophoenix]

From the Frontburner:

BUILDING BRIDGES

Some people aren't terribly impressed with Calatrava's new design. (Some people also need to clean up their act.) I was discussing the bridge with our own David Radabaugh, who's a designer and a graduate of RISD (meaning he's smarter than some people). David says:

Sure, it's just four arches. But you have to see past the balsa wood and foam model. Architecture is not just about SHAPE--it's also about SCALE and MATERIAL.

Those arches are [expletive] huge! [David is smart, but he needs to clean it up, too.] Imagine a turtle the size of Dallas sitting next to Dallas. "Jesus Christ," people would say, "that's one big [expletive] turtle!" And we would all suddenly become aware of our own smallness. The bridge will be like the turtle--a benevolent giant watching over the city.

Now imagine how your experience of the bridge changes if the arches are made of stone, or wood, or aluminum, or even glass. The relationship of the bridge to the water and earth and sky and body is affected by the material. Take the feeling you have when you step inside a grand cathedral and anchor it to the Trinity. That's what these bridges will do for Dallas.

Feel better, Eric?

Tim Rogers · 01:13 PM

[texman]

From the Frontburner:

Those arches are [expletive] huge! [David is smart, but he needs to clean it up, too.] Imagine a turtle the size of Dallas sitting next to Dallas. "Jesus Christ," people would say, "that's one big [expletive] turtle!" And we would all suddenly become aware of our own smallness. The bridge will be like the turtle--a benevolent giant watching over the city.


Tim Rogers · 01:13 PM

30 Stories is a little excessive. Does the bridge really need it structurally or is it just for the looks? I like the comparing of the turtle, sorta like how Reunion tower watches over Dallas, positive or negitive, however you take it.