Just about every over pass I see on highways and local roads have steel beams. Why the need for a cable stayed bridge for this; what should have been a mundane pedestrian footbridge? Oh, the Feds are on the hook, let’s splurge ?
Just about every over pass I see on highways and local roads have steel beams. Why the need for a cable stayed bridge for this; what should have been a mundane pedestrian footbridge? Oh, the Feds are on the hook, let’s splurge ?
...
Yep, and all that money makes it easier for politicians and their friends to steal it. Supposedly this bridge was faster to build, but it wasn’t going to open until 2019.
Pretty bridges are an urban fad these days. Everyone wants to copy the Millennium Bridge in London. (It was pretty, but required a couple of years of re-engineering after the original crew collected their money and called it complete.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Bridge,_London
When politicians start re-directing money and undercutting specifications, you get fiascoes like the Margaret McDermott Bridge in Dallas. (Which they didn’t bother to stress test, hiding the problems until later) https://archpaper.com/2018/01/santiago-calatravas-margaret-mcdermott-bridge-cracking-wind/
According to one of the articles I've read they went with concrete to reduce vibrations. Evidently it was going to more than an overhead walkway. They were going to have benches and WI-FI access points so students could hangout.
Aesthetically pleasing. I’m sure they had a committee review several alternatives but this one was selected.
As a former County Engineer I was involved in a project that was much needed and had been under development for several years prior to my employment. The preferred design that had been selected had an estimate of $13 million but every attempt at securing grant funding to construct it, including TIGER grants had come up empty.
Basically I reviewed the other alternatives and chose the 2nd place alternate which only had a price tag of $3.5 million. I did this without a committee and then sold the plan to the Board of County Commissioners with the only drawback that we would have to throw away the previously spent $1 million on engineering. They said go for it and it was completed a a year later.
What was the difference? The expensive design called for the existing bridge to be removed and a new bridge be constructed. The one I selected utilized the existing bridge.
The one thing to take away from all of this is that never use a committee to select the design. They always take the one regardless of the practical factors.