(07-28-2017 02:52 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 11:35 AM)jamammy Wrote:  I guess as it stands there are three maybe four options aside from doing nothing.

Two of them will never happen.

Move the campus.

Move the train tracks.

Go over the tracks.

Go under the tracks.

Or just build a simple pedestrian bridge and call it that.

All this iconic stuff is bull and will make it the subject of ridicule.

No vision.

(07-28-2017 06:22 PM)mphsfan Wrote:  At that age we used a stop watch, now a sundial is close enough.

iPhone, bicycle and an automobile. I have all three.

If I'm in a hurry, I don't have to run anywhere...anymore.

#EnjoyingMyGoldenYears

(07-28-2017 07:18 PM)Tigerx3 Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 02:52 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 11:35 AM)jamammy Wrote:  I guess as it stands there are three maybe four options aside from doing nothing.

Two of them will never happen.

Move the campus.

Move the train tracks.

Go over the tracks.

Go under the tracks.

Or just build a simple pedestrian bridge and call it that.

All this iconic stuff is bull and will make it the subject of ridicule.

No vision.

I think he is suggesting that what they are going to build shouldn't be called a land bridge but a pedestrian bridge.

The initial proposal features an iconic land bridge not a rickety, scary scaffold.

No vision may be true may be true but that moniker would more closely fit the final decision makers in the campus projects.

I still agree there needs to be something.

But a true land bridge is the stuff that gives character and immediate prestige to the University.

Maybe we aren't ready for that.

(07-28-2017 11:35 AM)jamammy Wrote:  I guess as it stands there are three maybe four options aside from doing nothing.

Two of them will never happen.

Move the campus.

Move the train tracks.

Go over the tracks.

Go under the tracks.

How about some Goa'uld rings.

(07-28-2017 07:28 PM)jamammy Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 07:18 PM)Tigerx3 Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 02:52 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 11:35 AM)jamammy Wrote:  I guess as it stands there are three maybe four options aside from doing nothing.

Two of them will never happen.

Move the campus.

Move the train tracks.

Go over the tracks.

Go under the tracks.

Or just build a simple pedestrian bridge and call it that.

All this iconic stuff is bull and will make it the subject of ridicule.

No vision.

I think he is suggesting that what they are going to build shouldn't be called a land bridge but a pedestrian bridge.

The initial proposal features an iconic land bridge not a rickety, scary scaffold.

No vision may be true may be true but that moniker would more closely fit the final decision makers in the campus projects.

I still agree there needs to be something.

But a true land bridge is the stuff that gives character and immediate prestige to the University.

Maybe we aren't ready for that.

Close enough.

Think in terms of building a tunnel for the roads and train instead of building a bridge for pedestrians.

I liked the first one also but it was changed. Be it due to money or a change in location for other facilities that impacts footprints for everything it's what leadership determined what we get.

The overall plan, I think we all agree, has been an ambitious plan to change not just the look but the character and utility of the campus and neighborhood like never before. What's been done is nothing short of miraculous when compared to our entire history. And they aren't done.

What is clear and we need to accept is that there will never be an OCS within the boundaries of the main campus. One day, if the promise of P5 status is on the table, the boundaries of our campus may expand and an OCS discussed.

Rudd is generally willing to answer questions about almost anything. Put the land ridge change on tweeter and see what he says.

(07-28-2017 10:45 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 07:28 PM)jamammy Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 07:18 PM)Tigerx3 Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 02:52 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 11:35 AM)jamammy Wrote:  I guess as it stands there are three maybe four options aside from doing nothing.

Two of them will never happen.

Move the campus.

Move the train tracks.

Go over the tracks.

Go under the tracks.

Or just build a simple pedestrian bridge and call it that.

All this iconic stuff is bull and will make it the subject of ridicule.

No vision.

I think he is suggesting that what they are going to build shouldn't be called a land bridge but a pedestrian bridge.

The initial proposal features an iconic land bridge not a rickety, scary scaffold.

No vision may be true may be true but that moniker would more closely fit the final decision makers in the campus projects.

I still agree there needs to be something.

But a true land bridge is the stuff that gives character and immediate prestige to the University.

Maybe we aren't ready for that.

Close enough.

Think in terms of building a tunnel for the roads and train instead of building a bridge for pedestrians.

I already included that.

I think it would be the cheapest way out.

Go under the train.

Build up the area similar to the Fo-way down at Semmes.

But again tunnels are dark and scary and not awesome like a land bridge.

I have visions of students crossing the bridge with wildlife indigenous to the area.

Small deer, foxes, flying squirrels, hawks, falcons, Fred, bunny rabbits.

It's a beautiful image.

I must admit I have no idea what you have to go through when dealing with railroads as far as codes and whatnot.

120m in new construction projects... let's ***** about the bridge

I mean I guess you could take two extension ladders, extend them all the way out, duct tape them together at the top, and cement them into the ground at the bases.

Voila.

Again, anything is better than waiting on a train while you are supposed to be in class.

It's an f-ing University for Pete's sake.

The access bridge of whatever sort should come first then the other stuff.

It's dangerous to hop over the car couples or under them.

Am I the only one who outran it down Southern in an auto mobile?

(07-29-2017 12:00 PM)jamammy Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 10:45 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 07:28 PM)jamammy Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 07:18 PM)Tigerx3 Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 02:52 PM)Claw Wrote:  Or just build a simple pedestrian bridge and call it that.

All this iconic stuff is bull and will make it the subject of ridicule.

No vision.

I think he is suggesting that what they are going to build shouldn't be called a land bridge but a pedestrian bridge.

The initial proposal features an iconic land bridge not a rickety, scary scaffold.

No vision may be true may be true but that moniker would more closely fit the final decision makers in the campus projects.

I still agree there needs to be something.

But a true land bridge is the stuff that gives character and immediate prestige to the University.

Maybe we aren't ready for that.

Close enough.

Think in terms of building a tunnel for the roads and train instead of building a bridge for pedestrians.

I already included that.

I think it would be the cheapest way out.

Go under the train.

Build up the area similar to the Fo-way down at Semmes.

But again tunnels are dark and scary and not awesome like a land bridge.

I have visions of students crossing the bridge with wildlife indigenous to the area.

Small deer, foxes, flying squirrels, hawks, falcons, Fred, bunny rabbits.

It's a beautiful image.

My idea is the opposite. You build the top of a tunnel OVER the railroad and the streets. Cars and trains now go through a tunnel. The top of the tunnel connects the land on both sides and you have an area from the waterworks to Patterson of new land available.

lol

This University had to fight tooth and nail and pony up for the current at-grade walkways/fence to get a pedestrian bridge.

Rail don't play nice. This is the last concession the University will get out of BNSF.

(07-28-2017 08:06 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(07-28-2017 06:26 AM)TG4 Wrote:  Sure beats playing "race the train" before class

Or climbing the train to get to class.

Or putting a penny on the tracks and watch it derail.

(07-29-2017 04:06 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  lol

This University had to fight tooth and nail and pony up for the current at-grade walkways/fence to get a pedestrian bridge.

Rail don't play nice. This is the last concession the University will get out of BNSF.

This could be a campus landmark; the place where Alumni pilgrimage back to and take pictures with a train as it passes underneath.

Another stroke of genius!

FWIW, Here was my response to the design problem 3 years ago in studio. Did they steal my idea of a suspension bridge? You be the judge...

Looks like it to me.

Damn.

Now, we have gone from a brilliant, iconic plan to a stolen two bit idea.

It's a bad look, breh.

A bad look.

Hey... wait a minute. Two bit idea?

The latest diagrams of the plans. Does this change any opinions of the bridge?

Campus construction plans