View Full Version : Skydance Bridge



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

Pete
02-15-2012, 07:13 PM
I think the point was to have the main part of the structure centered over the highway.

If it spanned the whole distance, the most important part would be on the side of the freeway rather than looming over it.

iMAX386
02-16-2012, 01:49 AM
If it still had the suspension cables then the asymmetry of its position on the bridge wouldn't seem odd. With the cables it had visual elements spanning over the west-bound lanes which helped the bird seem centered...the cable-less version lost that and loses the implied motion towards the northern portion of the bridge: http://imaginativeamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/imagi_butzer_bridge_01.jpg

Watson410
02-16-2012, 07:12 AM
I don't think it looks odd at all... To be honest, it would look horrible if it were centered over the median. IMO. It's called art, Art isn't suppose to be perfect.

Watson410
02-16-2012, 07:14 AM
To add on to my last post, It's not even possible to center it unless you make the "bird" structure 4 times bigger... Which would cost 4 times as much.

MadMonk
02-22-2012, 09:58 AM
If it still had the suspension cables then the asymmetry of its position on the bridge wouldn't seem odd. With the cables it had visual elements spanning over the west-bound lanes which helped the bird seem centered...the cable-less version lost that and loses the implied motion towards the northern portion of the bridge: http://imaginativeamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/imagi_butzer_bridge_01.jpg
Every time I see this rendering, I can't help but be disappointed with what we ended up with.

MDot
02-22-2012, 10:46 AM
Every time I see this rendering, I can't help but be disappointed with what we ended up with.

Boo hoo! Haha

Watson410
02-22-2012, 12:38 PM
Old news! It's there, it's not going anywhere or changing... Let's accept it and be excited about us actually getting something like this... Anyways, does anyone have any new info on when it will be powered up?

OKCisOK4me
02-22-2012, 01:29 PM
Old news! It's there, it's not going anywhere or changing... Let's accept it and be excited about us actually getting something like this... Anyways, does anyone have any new info on when it will be powered up?

There was a radio interview recording posted a couple pages back with the designers and they said it would have eventual lighting, something the city folk didn't quite deliver to the general public. I think they said April or May. But as far as lighting being on all the time, they really didn't specify. Of course, I only listened to Part 1 of 3 parts.

MadMonk
02-22-2012, 07:50 PM
Boo hoo! Haha


Old news! It's there, it's not going anywhere or changing... Let's accept it and be excited about us actually getting something like this... Anyways, does anyone have any new info on when it will be powered up?
It's like being told you are going to Disney World and they take you to Frontier City - spin it however you will, it's just not the same. However, while I've never seen so many so excited about mediocrity, I suppose you should be commended for your glass-half-full attitudes.

jn1780
02-22-2012, 08:07 PM
It's like being told you are going to Disney World and they take you to Frontier City - spin it however you will, it's just not the same. However, while I've never seen so many so excited about mediocrity, I suppose you should be commended for your glass-half-full attitudes.

No, its like being told you would receive one abstract sculpture and you received another abstract sculpture instead. If people are shown two renderings and they knew nothing about how much each one costs and more importantly which one was the original design I guarantee you people would have differing opinion about which one they thought looked better. None of us on this forum can give a non biased opinion.

jn1780
02-22-2012, 08:10 PM
Old news! It's there, it's not going anywhere or changing... Let's accept it and be excited about us actually getting something like this... Anyways, does anyone have any new info on when it will be powered up?

I-40 is dark from I-235 to Walker so I imagine it will be when everything else gets powered up.

Watson410
02-22-2012, 09:47 PM
I can't wait! I'm ready to see it lighten up our skyline along with the tower.

MDot
02-22-2012, 09:52 PM
It's like being told you are going to Disney World and they take you to Frontier City - spin it however you will, it's just not the same. However, while I've never seen so many so excited about mediocrity, I suppose you should be commended for your glass-half-full attitudes.

I hear what you're saying, but again, boo hoo. ;-)

bucktalk
02-23-2012, 05:22 AM
Recent winds and upcoming spring winds will certainly test the art structure of the bridge!!

Bellaboo
02-23-2012, 06:33 AM
Recent winds and upcoming spring winds will certainly test the art structure of the bridge!!

I saw an interview with Hans Butzer, and he answered that it was engineered to with stand 80 mph winds with 1 " of ice covering it.... should be no problem...

MadMonk
02-23-2012, 07:44 AM
No, its like being told you would receive one abstract sculpture and you received another abstract sculpture instead. If people are shown two renderings and they knew nothing about how much each one costs and more importantly which one was the original design I guarantee you people would have differing opinion about which one they thought looked better. None of us on this forum can give a non biased opinion.
Are you telling me that you prefer the current design better than the original? I wonder how many would agree.


I hear what you're saying, but again, boo hoo. ;-)
Oh come off it. Nobody's crying over it, just disappointed we didn't get the original design.

MikeLucky
02-23-2012, 08:29 AM
Are you telling me that you prefer the current design better than the original? I wonder how many would agree.


Oh come off it. Nobody's crying over it, just disappointed we didn't get the original design.

Oh there has been PLENTY of crying about it... just go back through about 20 pages of this thread and you'd think it was the end of the world.

And personally, YES, I do like the current design better than the old design... the first design was sleek and shiny, but it looked too "lean" for my taste. The current design looks great from either direction on the new I-40. Eastbound you just get slapped in the face with this structure.... and Westbound you have the bulkier portion of the bridge itself and a completely different perspective of the art structure.

To me the new design is much more "Oklahoma." More football player than ballerina, if you will. But, like others have said, art is subjective.... and this bridge is no different.

Bellaboo
02-23-2012, 08:39 AM
Are you telling me that you prefer the current design better than the original? I wonder how many would agree.


Oh come off it. Nobody's crying over it, just disappointed we didn't get the original design.

I like this better than the original......there are several suspension bridges that are too similar to the original..Wichita has one....this new design is 'one of a kind'.....very bold, just a personal preference.

BrettM2
02-23-2012, 09:48 AM
And personally, YES, I do like the current design better than the old design... the first design was sleek and shiny, but it looked too "lean" for my taste. The current design looks great from either direction on the new I-40. Eastbound you just get slapped in the face with this structure.... and Westbound you have the bulkier portion of the bridge itself and a completely different perspective of the art structure.

To me the new design is much more "Oklahoma." More football player than ballerina, if you will. But, like others have said, art is subjective.... and this bridge is no different.

I agree. I think it looks great. We can keep comparing it to the first design, but we still have a great piece of work going over the new highway. I can see the total disappointment if we went from the first design to a simple pedestrian bridge with chainlink fence all around it (like the section over I-44 in SW OKC). That would be a major let down.

MDot
02-23-2012, 10:32 AM
Oh come off it. Nobody's crying over it, just disappointed we didn't get the original design.

Oh come off it?? Nobody's crying over it?? You took me seriously??..... Haha, I was playing with you you sensitive monk. LOL I figured the 'haha' and winking face made it obvious..

Pete
02-23-2012, 10:40 AM
Besides appearance the lack of support wires on the sculpture seems to lead to some confusion.

My friends and family there have asked me: What IS it?

That's a fair question because the only purpose is ornamental and if it had truly been built to support the structure it would make more sense to the casual passer-by.

On the other hand, I think as Oklahomans we aren't used to public art and hopefully that will change.

MadMonk
02-23-2012, 12:55 PM
Oh come off it?? Nobody's crying over it?? You took me seriously??..... Haha, I was playing with you you sensitive monk. LOL I figured the 'haha' and winking face made it obvious..
Sorry, I didn't catch that. Mea culpa.

MDot
02-23-2012, 12:57 PM
Sorry, I didn't catch that. Mea culpa.

It's all cool, MadMonk. =)

OKCisOK4me
02-23-2012, 05:47 PM
FYI, I went downtown today and I took I-40 westbound from I-235 but got off at Robinson so I really didn't notice the bridge. Then I got back on westbound at Shields and still really didn't pay attention to the bridge.

So as far as someone like me who has known about this thing for a long time and was really excited about it, I can't imagine it being a showstopper for other drivers. People should be used to it by now.

OKCRT
02-23-2012, 06:07 PM
The walk bridge OK to me but as long as those old steel mill buildings are in view it ruins the whole look from I-40. I can't believe the city hasn't made the owner bulldoze that eyesore. Makes the whole of downtown look shabby IMO.

dankrutka
02-23-2012, 06:15 PM
I can't believe the city hasn't made the owner bulldoze that eyesore. Makes the whole of downtown look shabby IMO.

That's not how things work. Besides, I think the fabricator buildings on Sheridan are far worse.

metro
02-23-2012, 06:19 PM
The walk bridge OK to me but as long as those old steel mill buildings are in view it ruins the whole look from I-40. I can't believe the city hasn't made the owner bulldoze that eyesore. Makes the whole of downtown look shabby IMO.
It's an industrial zone and a large supplier of steel in the U.S., it's not that bad, you can't produce steel in a shiny skyscraper.

MDot
02-23-2012, 06:32 PM
The walk bridge OK to me but as long as those old steel mill buildings are in view it ruins the whole look from I-40. I can't believe the city hasn't made the owner bulldoze that eyesore. Makes the whole of downtown look shabby IMO.

I agree that they're definately eyesores but KT and metro are right. It seems like I vaguely remember hearing that some of them will be torn down and nicer developments will come about. And before anyone suggests, no, I'm not talking about C2S. Perhaps it was city leaders expecting C2S to bring in development where all these warehouses are currently; can someone help me out here because if you can't tell I'm struggling while thinking to hard.

OKCRT
02-23-2012, 07:17 PM
That eyesore needs to be in another part of the city. There's been millions of dollars spent trying to spruce up downtown and as long as those building are standing it makes a bad impression of the downtown area. Travelers driving over the crosstown see that and it sticks in their mind when thinking about OKC. It really does make the area look bad.

The city would have been better off not building the skydance and instead paying off the owner of those steel buildings to bulldoze them.

Now that area would make an excellent site for a football stadium. I would rather even see first class casino/resort built there. Just about anything would be better than what's there now. I think that some people are just so used to seeing those buildings that it doesn't really register how bad they make the downtown look.

metro
02-23-2012, 08:26 PM
You guys are over reactionary and not realistic. Every city has industrial areas near DT, and two, where is all this money going to come from for property buyout, demo, and construction of something nicer? Maybe in 20-30 years, but you all have to be realistic, we are not going to see Urban Revival on a mass scale of 5-6 square miles or more In the next 5-10 years, this is OKC, not Shanghai.

MDot
02-23-2012, 08:44 PM
You guys are over reactionary and not realistic. Every city has industrial areas near DT, and two, where is all this money going to come from for property buyout, demo, and construction of something nicer? Maybe in 20-30 years, but you all have to be realistic, we are not going to see Urban Revival on a mass scale of 5-6 square miles or more In the next 5-10 years, this is OKC, not Shanghai.

That's what I was talking about... 20-30 years away.... I wasn't saying that they were going to start tearing stuff down tomorrow and have something built by the 1st of March that would make the nicest development in America seem like trailer trash. I'm sure you were talking more to OKCRT, but you said "you guys" so I'm obligated to respond to you. ;-)

metro
02-23-2012, 08:46 PM
20-30 years is probably being liberal too, 30-50 is probably more realistic.

MDot
02-23-2012, 08:51 PM
20-30 years to really get started, 40-50 to turn all those warehouses into hotels, condos, etc.

OKCRT
02-23-2012, 09:08 PM
I give it 2 years and it will be in the process of being history. There's no way that the city is going to let that huge boil on downtowns face continue to fester and ooze any longer than possible. If I had my way the wrecking balls would be swinging tomorrow. In fact,I am going to make it my mission to get things rolling on this.

Thundercitizen
02-23-2012, 09:19 PM
Been only 17 or 18 years since MAPs 1 began work.
Not too shabby, so far.
We still live in an energy-centric economy...have you seen the price of gas today? Could be sooner rather than later.

dankrutka
02-23-2012, 11:24 PM
There's no way that the city is going to let that huge boil on downtowns face continue to fester and ooze any longer than possible.

I'm just wondering if you know how city government works... The city can't just be like, that private property is ugly! Let's spend taxpayer money to buy it and tear it down! Taxpayer money needs to be spent to build sidewalks and make sure our downtown streets are 2 way all the way through. And again, they look 10 times better than the fabricator buildings that lead into Bricktown.

metro
02-24-2012, 07:09 AM
Kilgore, some of these posters live in an alternate universe.

Larry OKC
02-24-2012, 08:19 AM
That eyesore needs to be in another part of the city. There's been millions of dollars spent trying to spruce up downtown and as long as those building are standing it makes a bad impression of the downtown area. Travelers driving over the crosstown see that and it sticks in their mind when thinking about OKC. It really does make the area look bad.

The city would have been better off not building the skydance and instead paying off the owner of those steel buildings to bulldoze them.

Now that area would make an excellent site for a football stadium. I would rather even see first class casino/resort built there. Just about anything would be better than what's there now. I think that some people are just so used to seeing those buildings that it doesn't really register how bad they make the downtown look.

it isn't that ... with the old crosstown they were in an area that most didn't see as it was south and they were headed north into DT. Now that the realignment has happened it is all very visible and the whole C2S, MAPS 3 Central park etc. The Council declared the area blighted to facilitate change. Not that it wan't blighted before, just no one noticed it much.

Teo9969
02-24-2012, 08:26 AM
It doesn't look that bad!

Larry OKC
02-24-2012, 08:30 AM
In comparison to what you were looking at before (lower Bricktown...Bass Pro...Toby Keiths...The Theater etc)???

Rover
02-24-2012, 08:35 AM
Yes, it looks that bad. However, moving the highway changes the dynamics and that property should become more valuable because of the increased visibility, and possible accessibility. Economics takes over and increased land prices generally push things to a higher value use. Proximity to CTS with access should change the types of developments.

And, the cotton mill is moving soon anyway. Would make a great place for a NFL stadium wouldn't it? Or a major league soccer stadium. Or maybe a tennis stadium and tournament courts. Put up a few hotels and dorm/apartments around it and we would have a great Olympic training village.

betts
02-24-2012, 10:33 AM
Yes, it looks that bad. However, moving the highway changes the dynamics and that property should become more valuable because of the increased visibility, and possible accessibility. Economics takes over and increased land prices generally push things to a higher value use. Proximity to CTS with access should change the types of developments.

And, the cotton mill is moving soon anyway. Would make a great place for a NFL stadium wouldn't it? Or a major league soccer stadium. Or maybe a tennis stadium and tournament courts. Put up a few hotels and dorm/apartments around it and we would have a great Olympic training village.

It will be interesting to see how the price of the convention center land compares to the price of the cotton mill. I remember we were shocked at what they were asking, as well as the price to move the substation. It may well be that a new bar will be set for downtown OKC.

t3hwookiee
02-24-2012, 01:14 PM
It honestly doesn't bother me that much. I've seen much worse while driving across the country. St. Louis comes to mind right away. Sure, it could look better, and it will in the future at some point.

MDot
02-24-2012, 01:46 PM
^^I agree about St. Louis.

UnFrSaKn
02-26-2012, 11:03 PM
February 24 2012

http://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhider/sets/72157629099005684/

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7202/6933726065_d305c38242_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7049/6787611944_b3e685a82a_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7188/6933727645_4f3146445e_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7187/6933730805_9f3fdb7efe_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7045/6787617770_7ca8df74c5_b.jpg

iMAX386
02-27-2012, 12:36 AM
It's weird to me that all the lateral sections of the statue don't have the metal feather siding. It looks as if it's just incomplete and hasn't been added. Is there a reason for that? Like in Will's 2nd to last picture you can see the part of the right portion is missing that siding on its lateral side and you just the white piping. Same thing with the "tail" feature at the end of the structure where it connects to the bridge.

You'd think they'd be able to trim that siding to fit odd angles.

Thundercitizen
02-27-2012, 12:59 AM
Nice pics, Will. Thanks.
Someday, an awesome photo composition might include the the bridge, the Peake, and DT lit up at late dusk...just light enough to see the structures and LEDs.

UnFrSaKn
03-03-2012, 04:18 PM
March 3 2012

http://www.flickr.com/photos/williamhider/sets/72157629505039199/

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7059/6803791254_4a914d26fa_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7176/6949901103_305c2f0a9a_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7203/6803791700_93e4217d87_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7068/6949901561_b776a5947f_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7180/6803792134_1839ea033a_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7178/6803792644_d6a772dc69_b.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7210/6803793736_ed8f6a80d2_b.jpg

redrunner
03-03-2012, 04:22 PM
I guess no riding of bicycles across the bridge is allowed.

Correction: there is a separate ramp leading up to bridge in addition to stairs.

Urbanized
03-03-2012, 04:23 PM
Why would you say that?

metro
03-03-2012, 04:28 PM
I guess no riding of bicycles across the bridge is allowed.

What I don't get is they redesigned the bridge because of ODOTs last minute stunt to make the bridge weight bearing for maintenance vehicles, now they go put up these barrier poles. How on earth are the "maintenance vehicles" going to get on the bridge now?

redrunner
03-03-2012, 04:29 PM
Why would you say that?

nevermind, just kidding. Didn't see the ramp leading up to the bridge. Just saw the stairs at first.

rcjunkie
03-03-2012, 04:30 PM
What I don't get is they redesigned the bridge because of ODOTs last minute stunt to make the bridge weight bearing for maintenance vehicles, now they go put up these barrier poles. How on earth are the "maintenance vehicles" going to get on the bridge now?

most locations with similar usage have these, they are very easy to remove when access to bridge is needed.

jn1780
03-03-2012, 04:31 PM
I guess no riding of bicycles across the bridge is allowed.

Do you say that because you saw the stairs and assumed there were no ramps? ADA compliance says there has to be ramps. Plus, you see ramps also in Will's pics.

Edit: just saw your second post.

redrunner
03-03-2012, 04:32 PM
What I don't get is they redesigned the bridge because of ODOTs last minute stunt to make the bridge weight bearing for maintenance vehicles, now they go put up these barrier poles. How on earth are the "maintenance vehicles" going to get on the bridge now?

Good point, it's possible that they will be cutting the height of the poles and slipping a removable larger pole over the top. If maintenance removes the slip on pole they could probably drive over the shorter permanent pole. Just thinking out loud.

redrunner
03-03-2012, 04:33 PM
Do you say that because you saw the stairs and assumed there were no ramps? ADA compliance says there has to be ramps. Plus, you see ramps also in Wills pics.

Didn't see the ramps at first but yeah it was because I only saw the stairs.

okcphotoguy76
03-03-2012, 09:47 PM
Here is a night shot I took of the new I-40 and the Skydance Bridge. Anyone know when they will light up the bridge again?
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7060/6951034879_790f39de92.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/alonzoadamsphotography/6951034879/)
Oklahoma City I-40 Crosstown Expressway (http://www.flickr.com/photos/alonzoadamsphotography/6951034879/) by AlonzoAdamsOKC (http://www.flickr.com/people/alonzoadamsphotography/), on Flickr

jbrown84
03-03-2012, 10:53 PM
It's gonna be a bridge to nowhere for a while...

(apologies if someone beat me to that joke)

metro
03-04-2012, 07:46 AM
It's alright, you've been late to the party on all your jokes/posts lately..

Pete
03-04-2012, 08:48 AM
Here is a night shot I took of the new I-40 and the Skydance Bridge. Anyone know when they will light up the bridge again?

Beautiful work as always!

The City has not given a definite date when the permanent lighting will be enabled on the bridge. Previously, they used temporary generators to test the lighting and for New Year's Eve.