Bridge over troubled financing

There are people out there who are so stupid they will spend an astronomical amount of money on an ugly Monet to hang in their home when they could have purchased, at far less cost, a far more stunning work of art by a much less well-known French impressionist. Thirteen of these dummies sit on the Dallas City Council.

I was thinking about that this morning while watching the City Council debate the merits of a Calatrava signature bridge to replace the current Interstate 30 bridge that spans Trinity Creek. I was thinking the debate should not be about whether the city should spend any more tax funds on this bridge (it shouldn’t), whether a better looking bridge will improve economic conditions in West Dallas (a freeway bridge, by definition, won’t and I can’t believe anyone is gullible enough to think it will), or even what part of the bridge — the pedestrian section, the bicycle section, the frontage road section, the feeder road section or the main bridge — should be designed by the noted Spanish architect.

The debate is why the city has boxed itself into the dilemma where the choices, as council member Dave Neumann so patronizingly put it, are between a Calatrava bridge and one that replicates the bridge in place now, except in much better condition.

I remember sitting in my hotel room the very first night I ever spent in Seville, Spain, gazing out the window and seeing up close and personal my very first Calatrava bridge (pictured here). It was striking. So when I heard we were getting a Calatrava bridge or two or possibly even three I was excited, at the time.

But then two things happened. The first was the tanking of the economy. The second was the construction of Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge which, right now, looks like a glorified MacDonald’s logo. I saw a wonderful documentary about a child prodigy a couple of years ago called “My Kid Could Paint That.” I think of that film every time I see the Hill Bridge today — my granddaughter could design that. I know it will look far more striking when the spaghetti is added, but still, as I look at it today I think “If that’s a Calatrava signature bridge, than someone forged his signature.”

Here’s the thing, though. Why is it not possible to have a striking looking bridge designed by someone other than Calatrava? Someone who wouldn’t cost the city millions of dollars and then ask for additional funds as the design process wears on (as he’s already done)? The city sponsors a Trinity Creek Corridor Project photography contest and many of the photographs are absolutely breathtaking. We have some artistically talented folks running around here. I say let’s sponsor a Trinity Creek Corridor Project bridge design contest and see what happens. I’m betting we would get some submissions far more striking than that propose by the Spaniard and the stipend we would pay the winner wouldn’t have to be nearly the funds we will be shipping to Calatrava’s out-of-this-country bank account.

During the council debate this morning Mayor D-Wayne made the irrelevant comparisons of the proposed McDermott I-30 Bridge to the Golden Gate, Brooklyn and George Washington bridges. The reason the comparisons are irrelevant is because those bridges were designed for motorized land vehicles to traverse significant bodies of water where no means to do so existed previously. They were not designed solely to call attention to themselves. That they have done so makes them special.

If ever a Texas city needed a Calatrava bridge to traverse a significant body of water, it would have been Houston when the Interstate 610 bridge was constructed over the Houston Ship Channel. The reason Houston didn’t do this, I guess, is because its city leaders are smarter than ours. They would purchase the less expensive but beautiful French impressionist painting by the relatively unknown artist over the far more expensive ugly Monet.