Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just curious of everyone's opinions. This frustrates me like no tomorrow. I know I don't know all the facts, per se, and I'm not claiming I know how to run a city budget (because I don't) but the city council here just keeps making moves that seem so counter-intuitive to me. They have a habit of getting so focused on one idea (ie, fixing the Civic Center) that other amazing ideas get crushed most of the time. Again, I don't know much about city budgeting, so please inform me if this is wrong, but why couldn't the city just phase in the spending of the funds to redo the bridge over several years? Redoing that street-scape will not make people want the bridge to open, but if you invest in opening that bridge, people will see the more dilapidated areas around it (from a great view) and will be more demanding of wanting to make those areas nicer. The northern part of the state seems to care so much more about things like rail-trails and it ticks me off. As the biggest city (in both land area and population)and capital here, we should be at the fore-front of recreational opportunities. Yet we're 30 years behind. Like in most things. The Civic Center is important, and I'm glad the TIF district exists now and the council is trying to improve that facility, but the fact is that the same general thinking that the council has now (being too narrowly focused and closed-minded) is what got Charleston into the mess it is now, and the same one that allowed a mass exodus of almost half our population since the early 60s.
If the bridge was salvageable, then I would be all for it. However, taking into consideration the current poor structural shape the bridge is in, its not worth saving. The amount of money it would take to fix the bridge (the cost stated right now won't be the final price tag, it never is with major construction projects) would be better used to build a new bridge if the plans for a pedestrian bridge are to go forward. A new pedestrian bridge could be designed and built to last a very long time.
I'm telling you, a ped bridge over the Kanawha connecting the West Side to South Charleston and a 2- or 3-lane vehicular bridge with a wide, dedicated ped attachment extending over the Kanawha from Greenbrier St. over to UC would do wonders for the connectivity of the city.
The bridge is in too bad of shape, but if you could make the Patrick street bridge more foot traffic friendly, then you could connect that to the proposed trail network. This is a major project that should take 2nd place right behind the Civic Center on the "to do list"
If I remember correctly, the rough estimate was $17M to fix the concrete piers that are deteriorating. That's an awfully lot of money for a city to spend that has to charge people a fee to come to work.
If I remember correctly, the rough estimate was $17M to fix the concrete piers that are deteriorating. That's an awfully lot of money for a city to spend that has to charge people a fee to come to work.
I know this is an old post, but still I gota comment. the user fee isn't a need, but it helps improve city streets. Charleston as a city has a healthy bank account.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
