The bridge to nowhere is up, and if you look closely at the second picture, they tore up the crappy wavy steps and are pouring new ones.
The bridge to nowhere is up, and if you look closely at the second picture, they tore up the crappy wavy steps and are pouring new ones.
I bet if you didn’t highlight the shoddy workmanship, the crooked steps would have remained to reflect the true nature of the contractor and city officials…
Just my 2 cents.
Rumor has it the shoddy workmanship was already being addressed long before Scott reported it here.
Not that I want him to feel that he isn’t influential or anything.
Oh and by the way… those pedestrian bridges are always rusty. I dare you to find a single one anywhere in the trail system that isn’t. I have no idea why this is the case, but it is. I suppose the maintenance on painting a bridge is perhaps not worth it since the amount of surface rust won’t cause any long term damage.
They never paint railroad bridges either… yet they do often paint or coat bridges for autos. I’d be curious if that was because of road salt attacking unprotected iron or if there was some other reason but who knows.
Doubtful, they had plans to fix it anyway I heard later. I doubt a city inspector would have let that fly. I might have sped up the process a bit though 🙂
Costner – I was making fun of the rusty bridge. It would be nice if it was powder coated especially since we paid $750,000 for it! I do know that Cherapa place is donating some money to making the bridge look more pretty. I’m still confused why this bridge was needed. I have yet to hear one single person tell me why it was needed.
Cor-Ten steel. It’s supposed to “look rusty” It’s a special alloy that eliminates the need for poainting by forming its own natural protective coating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weathering_steel
And yes – it is salt sensitive.
… more and more ‘Quo’ (for the taxpayers) in ongoing saga which is the Quid Pro Quo which Munson arranged for Scherschligt.
Glad that the Scherschligt Stairway to the Stream is getting a touch up !
But I thought Scherschligt was an angel who was giving his all to the city out of nothing but love! 🙂
Ruf – sounds like something a hippie came up with. Is this a bridge or a Rat Rod?
http://www.google.com/search?q=rat+rods&hl=en&biw=1195&bih=945&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=EBV5TpztOaXnsQK1u83PDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CD8QsAQ
Who really gives a crap about all that nice looking stuff. Get the bike path finished.
You know what is really disgusting? We still have gravel streets in Sioux Falls. Just drive over to the East side of North Cliff. The areas behind Perkins and Burger King as well as the areas behind that auto salvage place are full of gravel streets many of which have no curb and gutter.
Then if you go just South of Benson and West of Cliff, that entire area has no curb and gutter. They don’t have sidewalks either in most of it, but I don’t think they care about that part.
I just seems that if the city has all of this money for pet projects along the river and if they have an extra $100 – $200 million to blow on an events center, that the least we could do is provide paved streets complete with curb for our taxpayers.
Are North-siders less important than those who live in loft apartments downtown?
Don’t answer that… it was a rhetorical question.
As to why the bridge is needed:
It isn’t really NEEDED. But then again, neither is a bike trail, or public parks, or paved roads. The purpose of this project is to spur private-sector investment by improving the public spaces in the most efficient (infrastructure-wise) neighborhood of the City. It’s true, the 6th and 8th Street bridges are only about 1000 feet apart (approximately a 4 minute walk), which might seem trivial. However, as any New Urbanist will tell you, a tightly-packed street grid (or “pedestrian grid”) is essential to cultivate a vibrant pedestrian environment.
The East Bank neighborhood is primed to become Sioux Falls’ next real urban neighborhood, and relatively cheap investments like this will easily recover their costs through the increased property tax base that they will generate.
If you really want to consider poor infrastructure investment, look no further than the Interstate Highway System. Does anyone really think that the tens of millions of dollars we spend building new interchanges (not to mention widening the highway, and building 5-lane roads to connect to the interstate) pays for itself by any means (gas tax, property tax, income tax, etc.)? I’d guarantee you it doesn’t. We build highways and interchanges for convenience, not real return on investment. The river greenway project does provide real, tangible return on investment at a reasonable cost.
Tom H. — what the hell kind of a well-reasoned, thoughtful response is that? Don’t you know this site is reserved for the nonsensical ravings of mad men and women? They don’t cotton to that type of thing around here. You mind your p’s and q’s mister.
Tom – I do understand the investment we are making, and I am all for fixing up that part of the bike trail. But the bridge is still unneeded when you consider their are two bridges with sidewalks a half a block in either direction. We could go without the bridge and amphitheater and it wouldn’t make a hill of beans difference to development DT. Like I have said in the past, this whole project was cooked up by Munson and Jeff Shlerhelfudirjrheist because the EC was supposed to get built next to Cherapa. Hell, when Mike Cooper was asked what the entire $5 million was going to be spent on a few years back, he couldn’t really say, he kept only saying, ‘Amenities’.
“Then if you go just South of Benson and West of Cliff, that entire area has no curb and gutter. They don’t have sidewalks either in most of it, but I don’t think they care about that part.”
Staggers used to bring this up all the time when they would force businesses in other parts of the city to pay for sidewalks. He asked where the ‘consistency’ was with sidewalks.
I have to disagree that the whole project will not affect development one way or the other. There is indeed a bridge in either direction about 500 feet away (a city block in SF is 330 feet, BTW), but it’s not just proximity that matters, it’s access. East Bank redevelopment hinges on turning a former industrial area into a place where people will want to live, work, shop, and walk. Think Phillips Ave – this is the goal we should have for his neighborhood, not just another auto-dependent sea of parking lots. It’s already starting with some great anchors like 8th & RR, Monk’s, Queen City, etc.
The area really will need some help to achieve such a goal. Removing the river ramp is one thing that will help; creating active and vital public spaces is another. Bulldozing land and just telling the developers “have at it!” won’t produce the sort of urban spaces that this city desperately needs.
As far as sidewalks go – I believe that sidewalks should be mandatory on every street in the City, and it should be paid for out of the Neighborhood Street Repair fund. Streets are not just roads; the Street is everything between the property lines: sidewalks, boulevards, bike lanes, pavement and all. “Walkability” is not a word that I hear bandied about much in this town, but we would do well to think twice about our addicition to sprawl and its consequences.
Tom – BRRRRRRRR! Wrong answer. I’m sorry, but you could have spent about $500,000, landscaped that area and put in new trail, and it would be just as nice and inviting. We have this idea that DT should have a bit of an elitist feel about it. I don’t think so, why do you think most people don’t frequent DT? We have to start thinking more modestly these days. We can still develop DT and make it great without adding a bunch of bullshit bridges and quartzite rock thingies.
We paid extra for that look, it’s called “distressed”.
I would think someone as visual as yourself would appreciate that, it’s all the rage in those cosmopolitan places where lots of men wear hats.
@Costner – aside from atreial streets – street construction/reconstruction costs are the responsibility of the individual property owners along those streets. I.E., it would caost the individual property owners $x per linear foot to get those gravel streets inmproved. The “rest of the city” doesn’t pay for it. Just those folks.
The process goes something loike this. the city resolves to fix the streets. If 60% or greater of the property owners affected (weighted by linear foot) petition OUT of the resolution, the entire segment does NOT get upgraded. The per linear foot weighting is signifcant. let’s say that of 30 property owners 20 of them DO want the street updated. HOWEVER, the remaining 10 owners control 70% of the linear footage. Ain’t gonna happen.
There is another segment of gravel streets just north of Madison on the West end of West Sioux. I suspect it is the property owners themselves (not the city) that is keeping these “quaint” areas quaint.
Lewis – I guarantee you – you will use the holy crap out of this bridge. I am also pretty sure that at more than a few times in the next 5 years you will be found dangling your tired dogs in the cool brown river while listening to some baladeer on the stage.
Lewis:
I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I agree for the most part with your call for austerity, but I don’t think this is the place to be doing it. Spending millions of dollars a year to subsidize inefficient suburban development patterns (ever notice how many more lane-miles per person there are out near the edge of town?) is what is now, and will be even moreso in the future, the biggest drain on City finances going forward. A modest investment ($5M) on public spaces in the heart of the City (which, per capita, has the most efficient use of public investment in the city) encourages exactly the kind of development (urban and infill) that will strengthen Sioux Falls going forward.
Yes, I agree with you, $5M is a lot of money and there were probably cheaper alternatives. But not all City investments are the same – a dollar invested downtown is not the same as a dollar invested at 69th & Southeastern – at least not on the outcomes side of the equation, which is where we should be most concerned.
Tom – I do agree with your math. Investment DT has a lot more payback.
“There is another segment of gravel streets just north of Madison on the West end of West Sioux.”
Used to have a friend who lived back there. It was great going to his place, it was like ‘going out in the country.’ Dusty as fuck though when the wind kicked up.
Ruf is right, people with gravel roads around their homes probably are not paying the property taxes the Tuthill Fairies are paying.
A modest investment ($5M) on public spaces in the heart of the City ….
~Tom H
5 million Tom? Try 7 million. We’re already tapping into phase II money, ( the 1.9 million Morrell ENVIRONMENTAL money) And 7 million for what? A bridge to nowhere, shoddy workmanship, and a project far, far from even being close to what was promised for the original 5.1 million. Apologize for this all you want. It is what it is. A giant money pit.
No kidding.