New I-244 Bridge

[sgrizzle]

I see no reason it can't be used now other than the alignment with current roadways and the bum haven under the existing eastbound 244 bridge.  If it can't be used by pedestrians due to structural problems, then it should be torn down if it's in that bad of shape.

They have done work to preserve it so it's not getting worse, but it will take a lot of money to make it usable by the public again. No-one wants to demo it since it is fixable (with enough money) and it one of the very few existing Route 66 bridges, not to mention adjacent to avery plaza and the upcoming Route 66 museum.

[Conan71]

They have done work to preserve it so it's not getting worse, but it will take a lot of money to make it usable by the public again. No-one wants to demo it since it is fixable (with enough money) and it one of the very few existing Route 66 bridges, not to mention adjacent to avery plaza and the upcoming Route 66 museum.

My point is, how rickety does a concrete bridge like that need to be so that it cannot withstand a 200 pound or so pedestrian or a bunch of them streaming over the bridge?  Other than the homeless colony off the west end of the bridge, I can't see what the danger is in opening it up to foot and bicycle traffic now.

I'm all for preservation of public treasures, but our sentimentality for concrete & steel items is getting really expensive.

[sgrizzle]

They ran an asphalt paver over it so it can hold the weight of a person. If you make it a pedestrian bridge you probably have to put railings on the side, certify capacity, add new crosswalks to get to it, etc. Not to mention, why go to all the money when there is already a pedestrian crossing over the river at that point.

Last plan I heard was to make it a place for outdoor festivals, but they needed to get outlets and such down the length of the bridge for tents and vendors. It's not a high priority when they haven't even started building the museum yet.

I'm not sure how keeping the bridge as is counts as "getting really expensive" since there is no money being spent on it. The only person advocating spending money is you.

P.S. There seems to be some pipes/cabling running under the bridge, so demolishing could have many repercussions.

[Gaspar]

They ran an asphalt paver over it so it can hold the weight of a person. If you make it a pedestrian bridge you probably have to put railings on the side, certify capacity, add new crosswalks to get to it, etc. Not to mention, why go to all the money when there is already a pedestrian crossing over the river at that point.

Last plan I heard was to make it a place for outdoor festivals, but they needed to get outlets and such down the length of the bridge for tents and vendors. It's not a high priority when they haven't even started building the museum yet.

I'm not sure how keeping the bridge as is counts as "getting really expensive" since there is no money being spent on it. The only person advocating spending money is you.

P.S. There seems to be some pipes/cabling running under the bridge, so demolishing could have many repercussions.

They should turn it into a farmers market.  Install cloth canopies down each side and rent 10' x 20' booths.   

[stageidea]

They should turn it into a farmers market.  Install cloth canopies down each side and rent 10' x 20' booths.   

I think that is a great idea!

[Gaspar]

Used to live in St. Louis and we had a great open air farmers market that I went to every weekend.

We could call it The Bridge Market.  Great way to get folks downtown to engage in commerce.

[Red Arrow]

There have been a few comments in this thread about how to spiffy up a plain bridge.  One involved arches. Maybe we could get corporate sponsorship from a company famous for arches.

Running for cover now.....

[Conan71]

They ran an asphalt paver over it so it can hold the weight of a person. If you make it a pedestrian bridge you probably have to put railings on the side, certify capacity, add new crosswalks to get to it, etc. Not to mention, why go to all the money when there is already a pedestrian crossing over the river at that point.

Last plan I heard was to make it a place for outdoor festivals, but they needed to get outlets and such down the length of the bridge for tents and vendors. It's not a high priority when they haven't even started building the museum yet.

I'm not sure how keeping the bridge as is counts as "getting really expensive" since there is no money being spent on it. The only person advocating spending money is you.

P.S. There seems to be some pipes/cabling running under the bridge, so demolishing could have many repercussions.

Apparently I wasn't clear on my statement.  Of course it's not costing anything "as-is".  I was making a general statement about how costly preservation is of marginally historically significant public structures all around the country.  Old water towers, old bridges, old courthouses, etc. 

[joiei]

I think this blogger from OKC is having trouble with the thought that Tulsa might get a new bridge. 

http://www.thelostogle.com/2011/01/11/tulsa-tuesday-a-bridge-to-nowhere/#more-12703

[TheArtist]

I think this blogger from OKC is having trouble with the thought that Tulsa might get a new bridge. 

http://www.thelostogle.com/2011/01/11/tulsa-tuesday-a-bridge-to-nowhere/#more-12703

Egads, and with all the federal dollars they get they bemoan us a measly 50 mill?  Heck a single south Tulsa intersection can cost more than that. Tulsa is working to become more pedestrian/commuter friendly on many fronts.  Its a process that will take a generation to get established, but we have started. There are multiple facets to this plan that are being worked on.  This bridge is one part of that. You can pull out of that context any single piece and easily criticize it to high heaven if you wish, but you will only look pitifully ignorant to those of us who live here and know the "big picture" plan that is underway.

  I was quite thrilled that Tulsa got this.  Its said to be for "High Speed Rail", thats how we go the federal money.  But we locals know its really for local commuter rail.  Kudos to us for being clever enough to get it to happen.  After all, we all know in our hearts that Oklahoma will not fund a high speed rail system from OKC to Tulsa, and us continuing to push our core areas to be more pedestrian/commuter friendly first, would be the best scenario if by some miracle they were to fund rail to OKC. (frankly if I had the choice I would rather spend the money on encouraging pedestrian friendly development and mass transit in the city than between the cities at this point)

  As for "where would some soccer mom in Jenks park her SUV",,, apparently the writer is unaware of the types of development going in, now and in the future, near the river in Jenks.  Even a more "infilled" Tulsa Hills could be seen as part of the ever growing river corridor.   Plus, its well known that if we are to start commuter rail in Tulsa, the most expensive part is the first couple miles and couple of bridges in and near downtown.  Once you get that (from the West Bank and its development potential to downtown and to the Fin Tube site) you got it made. The rest is almost an easy breasy situation that most other cities would kill for. The rails are already there going to just the places you would want them to go in the future. Kudos again for Tulsa doing whatever it takes to get that first, tough, expensive, mile or so done, by whatever the means lol.  We usually get screwed by OKC so have learned that if we want it done, we are going to have to do it, however we can do it  . 

[Vision 2025]

The westbound is the one that makes sense for the muli-modal due to the rail alignment.

Something I find really curious is why did they put a fresh coat of asphalt on the old 11th St./SW Blvd/Route 66 bridge, but yet we are not allowed access to walk or bike across?  Anyone know?

What you see is a thin sealant (black because they contain carbon black as a UV inhibitor) to help with freeze-thaw damage and to reduce weed growth in the cracks.  An asphalt overlay would have required a sign identifying the site as the former location of the historic Avery Route 66 Bridge...it holds itself up just fine but unfortunately not much else.  

[SXSW]

Vision, when are they ever going to start building the Route 66 Museum?  Was it not at least partially funded by V2025?  That would really be an impetus for getting the Avery bridge rehabilitated, or at least starting to process to do so. 

And I agree with the OKC blogger about questioning the need for a bike/jogging trail on the lower deck.  Why not rehab the Avery bridge for that purpose instead? 

[sgrizzle]

Vision, when are they ever going to start building the Route 66 Museum?  Was it not at least partially funded by V2025?  That would really be an impetus for getting the Avery bridge rehabilitated, or at least starting to process to do so. 

The preliminary design contract negotiations are underway.

Preliminary discussions with River Parks, Michael Wallis and Green Country Marketing regarding interest in office space.  Anticipate two-phase design beginning in 2010.  Phase I: programming space for office, interpretive/static displays, conference meeting room, 3rd floor restaurant and street level commercial (gift shop, coffee shop etc).  Phase II: design drawings.  Combined Phase I & II time frame estimated up to 18 months.  Construction time frame estimate up to 18 months.

And I agree with the OKC blogger about questioning the need for a bike/jogging trail on the lower deck.  Why not rehab the Avery bridge for that purpose instead? 

The feds didn't give money for a completely unrelated project, they gave the money for this one bridge.

[Vision 2025]

Vision, when are they ever going to start building the Route 66 Museum?  Was it not at least partially funded by V2025?  That would really be an impetus for getting the Avery bridge rehabilitated, or at least starting to process to do so.  

And I agree with the OKC blogger about questioning the need for a bike/jogging trail on the lower deck.  Why not rehab the Avery bridge for that purpose instead?  

Rehab of the Avery Bridge is not a viable option.  It is structurally inadequate to do much more than hold itself up (not all that long ago an individual fell through the deck to their waist while walking on it)

Additionally, the funding source for the new bridge is "multi-modal" which means it must serve multiple methods of ground transportation making it more efficient (than having multiple bridges with individual uses) thus satisfying the Federal funding requirement.  

The pre-design activities necessary for the Route 66 Visitor's center are now underway.  Overall this project was delayed approximately 4 years by cash flow limitations with Vision 2025 created when additional funds were allocated to the Arena (BOK Center).  Presently, I expect construction to begin in 2 1/2 years depending on the final program and costs.

[DTowner]

Rehab of the Avery Bridge is not a viable option.  It is structurally inadequate to do much more than hold itself up (not all that long ago an individual fell through the deck to their waist while walking on it)

If that is the case, is there really any long-term viable purpose served by leaving it standing, other than the long-shot hope that a pot of gold will come along that will pay to preserve it for some purpose?  I understand its place in the pantheon of Avery Rt. 66 lore and I love old stuff, but at some point it's just a concrete and rebar reminder of how we don't take care of things very well.