Quote:
Originally Posted by moon
Well as I have said many times before I don't see any value in this so-called 'beautiful architecture" so I would go with a plain design that would get the best quality bridge for the cheapest money. I would pay 0 dollars to get some fancy design firm to create some ugly artsy thing like that.
A "plain" bridge that they seem to already have at a few spots over the river would work fine for me.
|
I guess the "bare minimum" is good enough, hey?
I'd like to point out that we're not actually spending $22 million on a fancy bridge; we're spending about $8 million to make an otherwise drab, boring and unintelligible water bridge crossing actually have some some visual flare, aesthetic attraction and create a new dynamic in our growing downtown.
$8 million dollars in a budget the size of the City's is a drop in the bucket. And as a city with over one million people that has a land size larger than New York, I would hope we can aim a little higher than "the bare minimum."