Dallas' Margaret Hunt Hill bridge arch starts going up! (Houston: construction, to eat)

[ladarron]

Originally Posted by C2H (ComingtoHouston)

These bridges are going to be nice and add a nice addition to Dallas's skyline, but i still think there's not much sense involved in the money being spent to build bridges of this magnitude.

Have you seen the old bridges, they need to be replaced. Some of the bridges in Dallas that cross the Trinity River are almost 100 years old.

[stoneclaw]

Originally Posted by ladarron

Have you seen the old bridges, they need to be replaced. Some of the bridges in Dallas that cross the Trinity River are almost 100 years old.

That's fine and all, but I'm talking about the arches and suspension part of the bridge. That part is unnecessary and is strictly for vanity purposes.

[ladarron]

Originally Posted by C2H (ComingtoHouston)

That's fine and all, but I'm talking about the arches and suspension part of the bridge. That part is unnecessary and is strictly for vanity purposes.

They put up a suspension bridge, because on day there will be a large body of water under it.

[stoneclaw]

Originally Posted by ladarron

They put up a suspension bridge, because on day there will be a large body of water under it.

Exactly. The large body of water is also for vanity purposes. An attempt to have more resemblance of the northeastern cities with riverfront downtowns. It's going to look awesome when its done but i stand by the fact that this whole project is strictly for aesthetic purposes. There were so many cheaper alternatives that could have been taken that would have been just as effective.

[quietthings]

I don't think anyone can argue that there is more style than function at play here. The fact is that there didn't need to be a new bridge, the alternative was free. A lot of people are calling this the bridge to nowhere, which is pretty much true at this point, but I think people should look to the future. I've read in a few DMN articles that there are already developers snatching up property along Singleton BLVD and the surrounding area. I'm hoping, and lots of others are too, that this will be a catalyst for growth on the other side of the river.

[ladarron]

Originally Posted by C2H (ComingtoHouston)

Exactly. The large body of water is also for vanity purposes. An attempt to have more resemblance of the northeastern cities with riverfront downtowns. It's going to look awesome when its done but i stand by the fact that this whole project is strictly for aesthetic purposes. There were so many cheaper alternatives that could have been taken that would have been just as effective.

Yeah, that is true. I think if the Trinity River was never dammed, the river would have more water

[Dallascaper]

Originally Posted by C2H (ComingtoHouston)

Exactly. The large body of water is also for vanity purposes. An attempt to have more resemblance of the northeastern cities with riverfront downtowns. It's going to look awesome when its done but i stand by the fact that this whole project is strictly for aesthetic purposes. There were so many cheaper alternatives that could have been taken that would have been just as effective.

Yeah, it's a vanity project - so what? The world is full of 'em. In a way, building a vanity project makes Dallas normal.

[stoneclaw]

Originally Posted by Dallascaper

Yeah, it's a vanity project - so what? The world is full of 'em. In a way, building a vanity project makes Dallas normal.

Are you on HAIF? You seem to be getting a little defensive over this. All people are saying is that its unnecessary money spent and its quite evident that Dallas wants to increase its world class status and its clearly not ready. Like someone pointed out on HAIF, The Ritz Carlton, a actual well-known name is only 63% leased and its been already been 4 years. It may be exciting to see a new tower and pretty new arches to look at, but that's not building a city. You can't honestly sit there and say that the overbuilding and vanity projects Dallas has been doing is normal.

But i rest my case. I think most people agree that these are exciting new projects for the city but not great economic ideas. Its just amazing that Dallas is willing to gamble so much just to try to be a hip and cool city. That shows that Dallas will give its blood to prove that it can be on par with the big boys. Balls over brains.

[Dallas12]

I agree that the money being spent on this bridge is unnecessary. Logically, we could have just built a regular bridge for a cheaper pricetag. However, what you need to understand is that this will be good in the long term future. Already large areas of west Dallas are prime targets for redevelopment in the future.

Also, it's great that we have this bridge, especially with a kick-a** design from a world renowned architect.

[ladarron]

Originally Posted by C2H (ComingtoHouston)

Are you on HAIF? You seem to be getting a little defensive over this. All people are saying is that its unnecessary money spent and its quite evident that Dallas wants to increase its world class status and its clearly not ready. Like someone pointed out on HAIF, The Ritz Carlton, a actual well-known name is only 63% leased and its been already been 4 years. It may be exciting to see a new tower and pretty new arches to look at, but that's not building a city. You can't honestly sit there and say that the overbuilding and vanity projects Dallas has been doing is normal.

But i rest my case. I think most people agree that these are exciting new projects for the city but not great economic ideas. Its just amazing that Dallas is willing to gamble so much just to try to be a hip and cool city. That shows that Dallas will give its blood to prove that it can be on par with the big boys. Balls over brains.

Why are you making a big deal over this, it is just a bridge. This bridge only cost 93 million.