I’m a bit confused, help me out.

From the article linked: “The bridge’s main feature, the giant sculpture, remains unchanged. Cables will still run from the sculpture to the main part of the bridge, but they will no longer be load-bearing, Thompson said.”

So, is the aesthetic of the bridge actually changing or is it just the materials/load bearing capacity?

I’m not a student of architecture, so will changing the bottom to a truss design and making it narrower be a change that a guy like me will notice?

If so, boo. If not, eh, doesn’t bother me.

Same excuse was made for not bending the road to save the Union Station railyard, when ODOT wins everytime, we all lose.

When you were a kid, you instinctively knew whether or not a tree branch would hold your weight. This is because humans have an innate sense of structure. Everyone that sees this bastardized bridge design will know something’s wrong… It will be embarrassingly obvious that the cables are superfluous.

The original design was so right and pure… and now it’ll just be a monument to value engineering and myopic bureaucracy.

Shame on us.

I’m with Matt. My understanding is that the intended purpose of the bridge was for it to be a striking and aesthetically pleasing piece of architecture over the new I-40. That goal still seems to be wholly achieved with the re-design. I don’t see the harm; only the engineering of the bridge has been altered, right?

To matt’s comment. when i first heard of the original scale back i was greatly disappointed – i envisioned a standard bridge with no asthetics. despite frustration I feel MUCH better knowing that the sculpture portion “sky dance” will remain and the only change is in the mechanics (tress bridge now) and not the asthetics – so it will still have an iconic presence. Again, the situation is still frustrating, and gives me concern for other projects in the works BUT I am not nearly as frustrated as before.

John,

Originally the soaring sculptural elements had a structural purpose… now they’re just there to hold up some dangling wire ropes, and look pretty.

The actual “bridge” portion of the bridge can support itself, without the tension cables or iconic sculpture. This means that the horizontal bridge structure will be so thick that it will make the cables look like a stupid mistake.

It’d be better to save some more money and eliminate the cables all together. Let the iconic sculptural element be just that!

I agree with Dennis. Better to have a total re-design that is structurally true than leftover cables. Bridge aesthetics should be driven by what’s actually holding it up. The sculptural feature could be just that.

Going from 30′ wide to 20′ wide is a big difference too.

Though I’m a bit of a pessimist when it comes to the utility of letter writing campaigns, I sent one to the mayor’s email, it reads:

Dear Mayor Cornett,

I just wanted to pass along my sincere concerns regarding the redesign of the SkyDance pedestrian bridge that will be a apart of the realigned I40. From what I understand, the budget has gone up enormously from around $5.2 million to around $12.8 million. Though I know your efforts to keep the bridge within the original budget is entirely appropriate from the standpoint of being a good steward of our public resources – I must ask, is there no other way? Is time really that short? $6 million, while a great sum of money, is a bridge that can be spanned given the enormous amount of civic interest in Core to Shore, and seeing that this incredible opportunity to build something iconic and noteworthy over this stretch of interstate is not lost forever.

Functionally, I feel it’s even more important since the I40 realignment will be at grade, instead of 6 feet or so below grade as originally planned. If the goal was to bring downtown to the riverfront – we need something big, and bold such as this design to span the gap that the new at-grade alignment of the interstate will create.

You have proved over the years to be a resourceful public servant – as a resident of Oklahoma City, and of downtown specifically, I’m asking you to please figure out a way to make this work. I hope it’s not too late. Let’s not miss this opportunity.

Yours sincerely,

Michael

I thought City Manager Jim Couch is technically in charge, either way, they both aren’t very outside the box when it comes to things like this.

Anyone catch the irony of the story in the same business section of Newsok involving W&W Steel- where the president said that clients are benefiting from lower material costs that have made construction cheaper in recent years and that
the most economical time to build is now? Gees!

steve ? what was the reason that the bridge had to be moved?

i know it was state preservation but why?

I am more concerned about the direction of the axes being altered. Why is this thing not allowed to be in front of Union Station?

From what the article says, it appears that ODOT is demanding the expensive changes & reconfiguration so they can drive heavy trucks out onto it. Why in the world do they feel the need to do that? When they build utility line crossings across the highway, they don’t ever drive trucks on to those— in this case, it seems they’ve decided “oh, there’s a flat paved surface— let’s spend $6 – $7 million reinforcing it so our overweight, out of shape employees don’t ever actually have to WALK for more than 10 feet!

Steve, need to go back and Photoshop the cables out of the rendering. New info in Thursday’s paper says the cables are gone. Does anyone know which council people voted for this redesign? Watched Tuesday’s meeting but didn’t catch where this was discussed/voted on at all.

Hadn’t seen this rendering before, is it new? Take it, it is Union Station in the foreground?

They need to redesign the name of this thing. Skydance? That may be the worst name for anything ever.

At-grade I-40, no cables on a bridge designed to be cable-stayed…ugh. Okay, it’s time to change the name of this grand project to more accurately reflect what it is becoming: “Core to Massive Loud Interrupting Interstate with Scaled-back Mutant Pedestrian Bridge to Shore.”

I’m very concerned these changes will destroy the connection to the river. It’s just sad to see such a great idea lost.

I am sickened by this. I will NEVER see this bridge once built without thinking “If only..”

To John..

It’s the form follows function principle that is now missing from the design that turns Skydance from a architecturally significant structure to be proud of to nothing more a hyped-up causeway with a big ornament on top.

It might appear very similar… but it will become disposable architecture.