bacjz00
|
|
« Reply #60 on: April 21, 2017, 01:37:38 pm » |
|
I'm a little disappointed that neither of the 2 designs which had "iconic" towers or arches made the final cut as I believe a bridge that can be spotted from far away would be a very good focal point and a draw for visitors to Tulsa. All 4 of the final designs are very low profile and IMO none of them are going to be very visible from anywhere other than the immediate area. 4 has the most potential maybe and is more unique, but honestly it's just a little too out there for my tastes. I dunno. Just wouldn't have minded seeing a little more height or "grandness" in the final designs
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
SXSW
|
|
« Reply #61 on: April 21, 2017, 02:19:08 pm » |
|
I'm a little disappointed that neither of the 2 designs which had "iconic" towers or arches made the final cut as I believe a bridge that can be spotted from far away would be a very good focal point and a draw for visitors to Tulsa. All 4 of the final designs are very low profile and IMO none of them are going to be very visible from anywhere other than the immediate area. 4 has the most potential maybe and is more unique, but honestly it's just a little too out there for my tastes. I dunno. Just wouldn't have minded seeing a little more height or "grandness" in the final designs
Hey there's still hope for that with the future 41st St bridge. Who knows when/if that will get built though.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Tulsasaurus Rex
|
|
« Reply #62 on: April 21, 2017, 02:19:23 pm » |
|
I'm a little disappointed that neither of the 2 designs which had "iconic" towers or arches made the final cut as I believe a bridge that can be spotted from far away would be a very good focal point and a draw for visitors to Tulsa. All 4 of the final designs are very low profile and IMO none of them are going to be very visible from anywhere other than the immediate area. 4 has the most potential maybe and is more unique, but honestly it's just a little too out there for my tastes. I dunno. Just wouldn't have minded seeing a little more height or "grandness" in the final designs
They may have been trying to avoid interfering with the views of downtown from the South(west).
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
sgrizzle
|
|
« Reply #63 on: April 21, 2017, 04:41:41 pm » |
|
I'm a little disappointed that neither of the 2 designs which had "iconic" towers or arches made the final cut as I believe a bridge that can be spotted from far away would be a very good focal point and a draw for visitors to Tulsa. All 4 of the final designs are very low profile and IMO none of them are going to be very visible from anywhere other than the immediate area. 4 has the most potential maybe and is more unique, but honestly it's just a little too out there for my tastes. I dunno. Just wouldn't have minded seeing a little more height or "grandness" in the final designs
Here are a couple I liked and didn't make it: Tri-arch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZV7YOZi_SUKKT Design #2 (which I like better than the one that got through): https://t.co/BqMFzieHiO
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
AngieB
|
|
« Reply #64 on: April 23, 2017, 09:22:29 am » |
|
I like both of those better than any in the final four! Maybe they were out of budget?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
sgrizzle
|
|
« Reply #65 on: April 23, 2017, 08:07:07 pm » |
|
I like both of those better than any in the final four! Maybe they were out of budget?
Only thing I can guess.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Tulsasaurus Rex
|
|
« Reply #66 on: April 23, 2017, 08:57:38 pm » |
|
This would have nicely complemented The Gathering Place's land bridges....
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Weatherdemon
|
|
« Reply #67 on: April 24, 2017, 07:50:08 am » |
|
Tri-Arch was really, really nice. Tying in the new, the old, and providing shade and sun. I can't believe it didn't make it.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
BKDotCom
|
|
« Reply #68 on: April 24, 2017, 08:16:05 am » |
|
Tri-Arch was really, really nice. Tying in the new, the old, and providing shade and sun. I can't believe it didn't make it.
$$$
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Vision 2025
|
|
« Reply #69 on: April 24, 2017, 09:47:28 am » |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
SXSW
|
|
« Reply #70 on: April 24, 2017, 10:15:48 am » |
|
I hadn't seen this night-time rendering of #4. Starting to like this one more but want to know more about the material selection for the decorative fins. I'll guess we'll know soon..
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
heironymouspasparagus
|
|
« Reply #71 on: April 24, 2017, 11:02:32 am » |
|
Looks 'unkempt'. Disjointed and not quite finished.
Not elegant or pretty at all.
|
|
|
Logged
|
"So he brandished a gun, never shot anyone or anything right?" --TeeDub, 17 Feb 2018.
I don’t share my thoughts because I think it will change the minds of people who think differently. I share my thoughts to show the people who already think like me that they are not alone.
|
|
|
Ibanez
|
|
« Reply #72 on: April 24, 2017, 11:18:16 am » |
|
Looks 'unkempt'. Disjointed and not quite finished.
Not elegant or pretty at all.
I overheard someone discussing this at a downtown bar over the weekend. They kept calling it "The Glowing Earthworm Bridge"
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
TulsaGoldenHurriCAN
|
|
« Reply #73 on: April 24, 2017, 12:05:24 pm » |
|
Looks 'unkempt'. Disjointed and not quite finished.
Not elegant or pretty at all.
I think it looks awesome at night. The lighting and reflection would really make it stand out. That is a blurry image. It looks far more refined in the better-quality image. It could probably use some refinement to make it look a bit more wavy and smooth at some points, but the concept really stands out. This one is maybe slightly better quality (mostly just scaled so you can see it without it being as blurry): https://www.facebook.com/KKTArchitects/photos/a.549088211790683.123933.160491340650374/1562996913733136/?type=3
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|