Skydance Bridge

[Kerry]

Time to re-bid the project. I hate this repeating crap of presenting Design A to win the contest, and then delivering Design B. It is time to tell these companies that when they are awarded the contract, the price is the price. The only reason the price should go up is if the City wishes to change something. I was recently thinking about adding on to the home and noticed one of the contractors tried to slip in a little line about me being responsible for any increase in the cost of materials (upto 25%). That one went in the trash because that told me there was going to be an automatic increase of 25% in my material cost. No thanks - time for a re-bid.

[Doug Loudenback]

OKC Council to decide on pedestrian bridge cost
By Brian Brus
Oklahoma City reporter
Posted: 06:03 PM Friday, October 22, 2010

Thanks for posting that Journal Record article, Warreng88. Hopefully the Oklahoman will do a timely article before Tuesday ... I'd like to hear and know more before going ballistic about this (which was my initial reaction).

Steve?

[Flatlander]

Is this the same pedestrian bridge that the city recently applied for a 12 million dollar tiger grant to fund?

[cdbthunder]

My wife and I saw the conceptual model of this bridge along with the new downtown park in the Cox Center on the way to a Thunder game. We both marvelled at the bridge's appearance and how iconic it would be for OKC, it is really sad this project has been scaled back.

[jmarkross]

Build the bridge the way it was presented. Find a way. It is as simple as that.

[Rover]

Build the bridge the way it was presented. Find a way. It is as simple as that.

So give or get the money and it will be built. Easy to demand. Hard to contribute.

[Platemaker]

Build the bridge the way it was presented. Find a way. It is as simple as that.

Agreed...

FIND A WAY !!!

[jmarkross]

Agreed...

FIND A WAY !!!

Precisely. Maybe the powers that be need a kick in the butt to keep things from being rinky-dink forever...and where's the the damn Ferris Wheel! Isn't doing anyone any good sitting a box somewhere. Rode it in Santa Monica...it's a good one!

[jmarkross]

So give or get the money and it will be built. Easy to demand. Hard to contribute.

That's a fair argument. Maybe someone who lives in OKC can get a fund-raiser going, or a temporary tax on beer to make it happen. Beer tax is the key to all the dreams of OKC...per capita consumption here is staggering...cost to families is tragic--in the extreme.

[OKC@heart]

There is likely a great deal of truth in what Nuclear_2525 stated in post #175...Unfortunately it is easy to seduce a comittee with wow and awe but when it comes time to pay for the truly unique it gets very expensive quickly. I do not fault the design as I feel that it is very important as a connector and as a landmark that will become synonimous with a drive through OKC. It will cause passers by to think that they need to stop and see this place. This is even more important with a somewhat depressed I-40 with less views of the city afforded. This is one of those occasions where there needs to be some creative strategy in finding a way to pay for what will undoubtably have lasting impact for the city. $7 million is not much for the scope of the bridge as designed. I am very worried about a revision and its net psychological effect on the citizens of the city. We are on the one hand far to eager to fall back to that old rut of, "Well see just like I always thought we can't expect greatness, cause we are just ole Okc..." No we should not just sit back and accept it, rather it is now time to hold our leaders accountable and say hey we were promised the first design and we are all invested in it arriving! We have marketed the crap out of the design in all of our PR clips and Core to Shore images...How is it going to look when the city then lowers the bar to the extent that it could call into question just how great a place this is to the corporations and companies that we are trying to attract.

We have far too much going for us and need this to be delivered as was intended. I definately do not have the answers to the solution, but know in my gut that this one is too big a deal to simply let go into the pile of burning unrealized potential of Okc's past.

[Larry OKC]

OKC Council to decide on pedestrian bridge cost
By Brian Brus
Oklahoma City reporter
Posted: 06:03 PM Friday, October 22, 2010

OKLAHOMA CITY – City Council members will decide Tuesday whether to approve a slight increase in the contract price for the Core to Shore Interstate 40 pedestrian bridge in response to rising construction costs.

...
Since the contract was signed, the estimated construction cost for the project increased from $5.22 million to about $12.8 million.

...
Public Works Director Dennis Clowers said construction is scheduled to begin in March in order to match work on I-40 by the Oklahoma Department of Transportation. The city has already let a contract to lay the foundation for the center pier of the bridge.
The project is being funded by a series of general obligation bonds approved in 1989, 1995 and 2000.

An early article (sorry don't have the title/date etc) had the cost at being even lower than stated in this article...

The city has also agreed to help the Oklahoma Department of Transportation pay for a $3.3 million "iconic” Harvey Avenue bridge over the new alignment of Interstate 40 being built a few blocks south of the current route.

So the cost has risen by almost 4 times the original amount (not surprising since the relocated I-40 cost has doubled).

Did anyone else catch the part where it said the City's portion was being funded by G.O. bonds going as far back as 21 years ago??? Guess waiting 10 years to get a fire station built isn't so bad after all.

Agree with Betts, this is a no win situation but it is a situation City leaders seem to get themselves into frequently (low ball costs when selling to the voters, and then reality hits). If you scale back to keep costs under control, promises weren't kept. If you build it to the renderings (or better), but at substantial higher costs, then again, promises weren't kept. That is while you should low ball revenue projections and high ball costs instead of the other way around.

We went through this with the original MAPS (overall, final costs were 47.75% more than what was sold to voters, even after scaling projects back). Some project costs were double what voters were told and scaled back (the Canal, voters told $9M, incomplete cost $23M or 2.55 times more). And that was for the scaled back Canal. We only got the middle segment (was supposed to connect the convention center, thru Bricktown, all the way to the River. They are adding a River "extension" that doesn't connect at additional cost.

As others have posted here, it happened to a limited extent with the Ford renovations (higher costs/scale backs). Many of the Ford renovations were included in the original design but due to cost overruns, things were scaled back then (to be paid for by the eventual pro-team tenant). But even with the scale backs, the Ford came in $8.8M over what voters were told. Add to that, the $100M to $121M more to do it later (more than the original cost of the building).

Don't be surprised when we have a repeat of events with MAPS 3. We have already seen a $40M "mistake" with just the Trails.

I agree, would love to see the renderings for the redesign. The article mentioned that the original design would be kept just in case additional money became available. That would imply that these changes were cosmetic, aren't structurally significant and can be added at a later date but this makes me wonder...

The original work will be maintained on file in the event additional funds become available for possible completion, Couch said. The original SkyDance Bridge concept involved a sculpturelike cable stay structure that was integral to the bridge. The redesign will incorporate a trussed bridge with a self-supporting sculptural “bird” concept, Couch said.

Sounds like it is a significantly different from a structure standpoint than the original design?? Which in turn sounds like replacing the bridge with a different one for the add ons Mr. Couch seemed to be talking about. Those here that are involved in that line of work, any thoughts?

[Spartan]

I'm not sure I'd spend over $10 million on a pedestrian bridge. We had bridgegate in Calgary lately with a LOT of citizens up in arms about spending $25 million on a pedestrian bridge that Santiago Calatrava designed that honestly isn't that impressive.

[ljbab728]

I'm not sure I'd spend over $10 million on a pedestrian bridge. We had bridgegate in Calgary lately with a LOT of citizens up in arms about spending $25 million on a pedestrian bridge that Santiago Calatrava designed that honestly isn't that impressive.

Spartan, I'm sorry about an overpriced bridge in Calgary with a bad design but I'm not sure that is relevant to our situation yet.

[ljbab728]

Precisely. Maybe the powers that be need a kick in the butt to keep things from being rinky-dink forever...and where's the the damn Ferris Wheel! Isn't doing anyone any good sitting a box somewhere. Rode it in Santa Monica...it's a good one!

I know you were just trying to make a point but I assume you know that the Ferris Wheel is a private project totally unrelated to any public expenses.

[jmarkross]

I know you were just trying to make a point but I assume you know that the Ferris Wheel is a private project totally unrelated to any public expenses.

Yes...it is private...maybe someone will mention to these people...a Ferris Wheel in a Box makes no cash...I just want them to hurry up and do something! Then OKC will look like a mini-London--with a Big Wheel by the River...

[bombermwc]

Well there's project #1 of C2S that's failed. Don't get me wrong because I would love to see it all work out, but I've felt from day 1 that the city oversold the idea. All that private development isn't going to happen the way they presented it. And we can't even get such a small part of the public projects done, then why should we believe anything will be.

We dreamed, and then woke up a realised, oh yeah, we're in the same pot we were already in. One that doesn't have any imagination...trussed bridge...yawn.

[jmarkross]

Well there's project #1 of C2S that's failed. Don't get me wrong because I would love to see it all work out, but I've felt from day 1 that the city oversold the idea. All that private development isn't going to happen the way they presented it. And we can't even get such a small part of the public projects done, then why should we believe anything will be.

We dreamed, and then woke up a realised, oh yeah, we're in the same pot we were already in. One that doesn't have any imagination...trussed bridge...yawn.

I understand your grievance here...but I remember manning the OCURA booth at the State Fair in the late 60's and the models which were presented of the changes to come (now extant) were all scoffed at--and--many people said none of it would ever happen. They even said the Liberty (Chase) Tower would never be built, and when I said "it's already under construction" they added it would never be finished...I guess only time will tell. All depends on the will of the people I suppose...

[Flatlander]

Did the city apply for a tiger grant from the feds or not?

[betts]

Although, like many other people here, I am disappointed at the prospect of not having the pedestrian bridge we'd envisioned, I do have to echo Spartan here.....It was never going to be more than an interesting pedestrian bridge. It's not like we're talking about a 8 lane span you could see ahead of you for miles. It would have been very nice, but it was never going to be the massive structure I think people envisioned. I suspect it was going to be very interesting and perhaps iconic as pedestrian bridges go, but people weren't going to drive to Oklahoma City to see it. It is certainly not the death knell for Core to Shore, which isn't going to spring out of Zeus' head fully formed. I'll probably be in a nursing home if alive at all when we can look back and say "Wow. Look at the Core to Shore area compared to what it used to be." This is a slow process, and the pedestrian bridge was never going to make or break the area.

[Pete]

It was to be the only iconic site on a very important stretch of new interstate and although only a pedestrian bridge, very high and striking.

Also, it was to be a real feature leading from the new Central Park (and all of downtown) across this barrier and on to the Oklahoma River.


I hate to be less than positive but I find this incredibly disappointing and years and decades down the road, we'll all regret not having spent the extra money... It will be an opportunity forever lost.

[okcpulse]

It was to be the only iconic site on a very important stretch of new interstate and although only a pedestrian bridge, very high and striking.

Also, it was to be a real feature leading from the new Central Park (and all of downtown) across this barrier and on to the Oklahoma River.


I hate to be less than positive but I find this incredibly disappointing and years and decades down the road, we'll all regret not having spent the extra money... It will be an opportunity forever lost.

We need to begin a letter-writing campaign petitioning city government that they need to complete this project as-is and find the funds to do so. I admit myself that all of this 'scaling back' junk is starting to get tiresome. Do it or don't do it at all. Oklahoma City no longer accepts option B as an option. Perhaps some funds should be diverted from the boulevard. I find this bridge to be more important than an ornate boulevard that is nothing special to outsiders.

Mayor, are you listening?

[Pete]

It's particularly disheartening when a highly-visible project like this has been promoted and used frequently as an example of great things coming for OKC. This has been out there for 2-3 years now.

I understand the budget considerations... I would much rather see funds go towards this than for a boulevard which isn't really needed.


There has to be some other things that could be traded in order to get this done correctly and as planned.

[metro]

Anxious to see what his son and regular poster Casey Cornett has to say.

[OKC@heart]

It's particularly disheartening when a highly-visible project like this has been promoted and used frequently as an example of great things coming for OKC. This has been out there for 2-3 years now.

I understand the budget considerations... I would much rather see funds go towards this than for a boulevard which isn't really needed.


There has to be some other things that could be traded in order to get this done correctly and as planned.

I definatley agree, and think that for those reasons stated and the negative impact this would have on the everyday citizens of Okc are reason enough to make sure this project goes forward. The design embodies all that we are hoping to achieve and project to the US. That we are a city that is not afraid to embace change and to take risks...we are self determining and creative and innovative and the city is a reflection of that. It calls back to its sense of place on the prairie giving homage to the state bird without being too literal. It is the type of design that can and will inspire folks from all walks of life and mean something different to each of them. It is a design that most can identify with and will be a tragedy if it is simply brushed aside.

[Urban Pioneer]

We need to begin a letter-writing campaign petitioning city government that they need to complete this project as-is and find the funds to do so. I admit myself that all of this 'scaling back' junk is starting to get tiresome. Do it or don't do it at all. Oklahoma City no longer accepts option B as an option. Perhaps some funds should be diverted from the boulevard. I find this bridge to be more important than an ornate boulevard that is nothing special to outsiders.

I went to the bridge competition and was thoroughly impressed with the designs that were submitted. Rand Elliott had a stunning giant "O" that was also a cable stay design. The Skydance Bridge held great appeal to me as well because it harnessed the collective creative power of multiple architects, engineers, and firms. We need to support our architectural field as much as possible and this seemed like a great opportunity to showcase outstanding local talent.

With that said, this bridge serves a much more important purpose. It is a giant "band aid" for what has turned out to be a "standard" highway design. Other than the aesthetic enhancements that were added at the end of the project, it is the massive scale of the highway project that is unusual. I liken it to our local version of Boston's "big dig."

The design of it though literally "severs" north and south and this pedestrian bridge is a valiant attempt to try to preserve the Core to Shore plan through the appeal of aesthetic design and functionality. The original plans sold to the public, called for a fully "depressed" highway at 18' below grade that would have been a complete opposite to the existing I-40 Crosstown. Bridges over the highway were supposed to be "at grade" and minimize the disruption to the grid. Instead, "cost inflation and engineering challenges of trying to depress a highway next to a river" has caused leadership to succumb to a "semi-depressed" highway with conventional ramping maneuvers making pedestrian crossing at normal streets challenging.

A great deal rides on the design of this bridge. The success of southern core to shore and what will be may drivers only impression of Oklahoma City since their view of our stunning downtown will be severed by the semi-depressed design.

If this is important to you, it sounds as though tomorrow's city council meeting is your opportunity to show council members representing suburban districts outside of downtown that this is a critical urban design element. It is the only mechanism unveiled that can even minimally compensate for our expansive highway and freight rail alignment. I accept the new highway as it is. It cannot be changed. But to allow such a critical urban connectivity element to be downsized, almost ensures the permanent pedestrian disconnection of downtown from the river front and Capitol Hill.

Go to council and let them know how you feel. Sign up item # VI-S or else you will be heard at the end of council after the decision/recommendations are already made.