New I-244 Bridge

[Hoss]

Anyone friends enough with the Mayor to tell him about his hair?

[bacjz00]

The Tulsa World showed a summary whereby the bridge is described as "Functionally Obsolete" but otherwise in fair to good condition.   Am I the only one who thinks this money could be better spent?  I'm all for a nice new bridge, but this just seems weird to me.  It's only a replacement for one direction and it won't even tie in to the existing trail system because it's on the wrong side (or will it?).  I realize that the multi-modal thing is a good thing and this bridge wouldn't have been possible without that so it's hard to be too upset really.  I guess when you're given the opportunity to get federal dollars, you can't be too picky with how they dictate you spend it.  Kind of the "beggars can't be choosers" philosophy. 

[Hoss]

The Tulsa World showed a summary whereby the bridge is described as "Functionally Obsolete" but otherwise in fair to good condition.   Am I the only one who thinks this money could be better spent?  I'm all for a nice new bridge, but this just seems weird to me.  It's only a replacement for one direction and it won't even tie in to the existing trail system because it's on the wrong side (or will it?).  I realize that the multi-modal thing is a good thing and this bridge wouldn't have been possible without that so it's hard to be too upset really.  I guess when you're given the opportunity to get federal dollars, you can't be too picky with how they dictate you spend it.  Kind of the "beggars can't be choosers" philosophy. 

Where did you see that at?  Oh, wait a minute, the World..I'm sorry.

Both sides of this bridge are rated 'structurally deficient'.

http://www2.news9.com/bridgetracker/

[ZYX]

The Tulsa World showed a summary whereby the bridge is described as "Functionally Obsolete" but otherwise in fair to good condition.   Am I the only one who thinks this money could be better spent?  I'm all for a nice new bridge, but this just seems weird to me.  It's only a replacement for one direction and it won't even tie in to the existing trail system because it's on the wrong side (or will it?).  I realize that the multi-modal thing is a good thing and this bridge wouldn't have been possible without that so it's hard to be too upset really.  I guess when you're given the opportunity to get federal dollars, you can't be too picky with how they dictate you spend it.  Kind of the "beggars can't be choosers" philosophy. 

[sigh]

This is an old argument. This bridge is one of the worst in the country. It's currently in worse condition than that one in St Paul/Minneapolis that collapsed. (no joke, I drove over that the day before it collapsed) The bridge needs replaced. Period. And since it needs replaced, why not upgrade it and be forward thinking. Your mindset is what has driven Tulsa into the ground in the past. We have finaly got a progressive idea out there. Let's be proud of it.

And by the way, the other direction will be replaced in 2013.

[Red Arrow]

[sigh]
This is an old argument. This bridge is one of the worst in the country. It's currently in worse condition than that one in St Paul/Minneapolis that collapsed. (no joke, I drove over that the day before it collapsed) The bridge needs replaced. Period. And since it needs replaced, why not upgrade it and be forward thinking. Your mindset is what has driven Tulsa into the ground in the past. We have finaly got a progressive idea out there. Let's be proud of it.

If it were really important enough to someone to have a pretty bridge, they could start a grass roots fund raiser. It's probably not too late for some cosmetic changes.  Stop depending on a few rich benefactors.  I find it amusing when someone here posts what they think on which project the (rich Tulsa family of your choice) should spend their money.  If you can afford to be on this forum, you can probably afford to contribute a few bucks to your favorite cause.

[ZYX]

If it were really important enough to someone to have a pretty bridge, they could start a grass roots fund raiser. It's probably not too late for some cosmetic changes.  Stop depending on a few rich benefactors.  I find it amusing when someone here posts what they think on which project the (rich Tulsa family of your choice) should spend their money.  If you can afford to be on this forum, you can probably afford to contribute a few bucks to your favorite cause.

When did I say anything about some "rich family" building us a pretty bridge? I didn't. I said the government was being forward thinking for a change, and that instead of building it exactly how it was, they're upgrading it to a double decker. Sheesh...

[Red Arrow]

When did I say anything about some "rich family" building us a pretty bridge? I didn't. I said the government was being forward thinking for a change, and that instead of building it exactly how it was, they're upgrading it to a double decker. Sheesh...

And since it needs replaced, why not upgrade it and be forward thinking. Your mindset is what has driven Tulsa into the ground in the past. We have finaly got a progressive idea out there. Let's be proud of it.

I thought you were joining the "it's not enough improvement" group.  My comments still stand but they are not (and weren't really intended to be) directed to you or anyone in particular personally.  It's a group think that I see wanting something done on someone else's money.  We are all included in that to some extent.

I like what The Artist is doing with his Deco Museum.  It's a passion that he is putting his personal resources into.  I finally got around to sending some $ to the museum to put my $ where my words are.  A pretty bridge can be the same concept.  If we really want more than a minimal bridge, we should be able to raise the upgrade money locally.

[SXSW]

I thought you were joining the "it's not enough improvement" group.  My comments still stand but they are not (and weren't really intended to be) directed to you or anyone in particular personally.  It's a group think that I see wanting something done on someone else's money.  We are all included in that to some extent.

I like what The Artist is doing with his Deco Museum.  It's a passion that he is putting his personal resources into.  I finally got around to sending some $ to the museum to put my $ where my words are.  A pretty bridge can be the same concept.  If we really want more than a minimal bridge, we should be able to raise the upgrade money locally.

"Rich benefactors" or local corporations are behind most civic improvements in Tulsa, and in most cities.  It is no mystery that GKFF is involved in numerous projects, including this one.  If they wanted to solicit more funds from regular people they could.

[swake]

If we really want more than a minimal bridge, we should be able to raise the upgrade money locally.

Why is that?

Look, the bridge is paid for by gas taxes filtered through the feds. We pay those taxes. It can easily and correctly be argued that as Tulsa is the largest city without non-toll interstate access in the nation that we are already being shortchanged in a major way by the state and feds on our return for these taxes.  

Additionally, currently Oklahoma City is getting a new showplace highway downtown with the highway being moved, buried and with several decorative bridges in order to enhance the downtown area there. If current tax monies can pay for that there, where they already have far superior highway access, superior highways overall and rail access that we don't have (but contribute tax money for, both state and federal) that we can ask for a more decerative bridge in our downtown. Many cities have such bridges nationally and I'm not aware that any of them had to make any such  local contribution. Why should we? We already pay tons of toll money in addition to our gas taxes that other places to not have to pay.

[Renaissance]

Many cities have such bridges nationally and I'm not aware that any of them had to make any such  local contribution. Why should we? We already pay tons of toll money in addition to our gas taxes that other places to not have to pay.

You might want to check that.  I would love for Tulsa to have a signature bridge, but they're expensive.  Dallas is dealing with a massive clusterfart where they had Calatrava design a new I-30 bridge but nobody stepped up to pay for it.  TDOT is now moving forward with designs for a "normal" bridge because the city doesn't have the money and the feds won't earmark for it.

Cautionary tale here:  http://www.nbcdfw.com/traffic/transit/119221594.html

[ZYX]

Swake, you are only partially correct. Yes OKC is getting their highway moved, but those bridges over it would be plain and boring if it weren't for MAPS III funds.

But OKC getting all this money to move their highway a few blocks south is pretty darn unfair to me. And what really frustrates me is that many OKCites say that Tulsa has recieved too much highway money and that said money was wasted. Are you kidding me? Last time I checked we weren't spending tens of millions of dollars to move I-40 five blocks south.

[Hoss]

Swake, you are only partially correct. Yes OKC is getting their highway moved, but those bridges over it would be plain and boring if it weren't for MAPS III funds.

But OKC getting all this money to move their highway a few blocks south is pretty darn unfair to me. And what really frustrates me is that many OKCites say that Tulsa has recieved too much highway money and that said money was wasted. Are you kidding me? Last time I checked we weren't spending tens of millions of dollars to move I-40 five blocks south.

They're probably talking about the $75 million we got for the IDL.  That WAS needed and has been for some time.  OKC residents should shut their cakeholes about the money we get, considering we don't have a professional basketball team that got tax breaks from the state for coming here.

[Red Arrow]

Most of what I've read says that our gasoline tax doesn't come close to paying for our roads.  The gas tax is usually the first thing brought up by road warriors when they want to squash a public transit rail project.  The fact that buses use "free" roads rather than pay to maintain their right of way is also neglected.

[perspicuity85]

They're probably talking about the $75 million we got for the IDL.  That WAS needed and has been for some time.  OKC residents should shut their cakeholes about the money we get, considering we don't have a professional basketball team that got tax breaks from the state for coming here.

Shouldn't OKC people be happy about the rail aspect of this bridge?  From OKC's mindset, all roads between Tulsa and OKC are one-way moving southwest.  I would think they would be in favor of anything that brings Tulsa consumers to them.

[Conan71]

I was told last month the bridge project was slated to commence yesterday.  Anyone hear of any updates?  I'm not anxious for more asspain construction tie ups right now, but we might as well get it over with.