I do not find cable-stayed brdiges (of any size) very attractive, but, my opinion about somebody's else's tastes don't matter. (That my tax dollars ARE taken to pay for somebody's (lack of) taste IS irritating, but I can do nothing about that right now.)
Regardless, I read more and more often that the large tower, the cable-stayed members themselves (hollow 8 inch pipes ?) and their connection fittings (8 inch pipe flanges and bolts ?) and the cable-stayed connections into the angled truss members are "decorative. "
If so, then these "decorations" are directly to blame, are they not? The "truss" cannot be symmetrical because every truss inclined member must align visually to its matching cable-unstay diagonal member coming up from the bridge lower walkway. Unsymmetrical members equal greater stress in some member connections than others, but all connections need to be "visually" identical = some are overbuilt = too expensive, take too long to build properly.
Regardless of intent, the 8 inch pipes are very long, and will sag under gravity: This creates an elegant appearance when they are installed in a traditional suspension bridge, but an ugly distraction when hung basically sideways in this case. Thus, whether intended or not, the cable un-stays MUST be under tension to be visually straight under their natural gravity load at the extreme angles of their design,(and must be heavier (stronger) to resist that sag if NOT under their proper function as true cable stays. (A true cable stay cable will be straight BECAUSE) it is in tension holding the bridge up.) These decorative cable un-stays would need to be even heavier and thicker-walled to resist the inevitable bending (sagging and droop) than needed to be in "real tension" as a true cable stay.
Further, a true cable-stay holding the original lighter weight of the bridge if it were a true cable-stayed bridge, would be a smaller diameter, lighter cable: Holding "up" the canal side of the bridge, thrusting down on the tower and foundation, and holding "up" the traffic side of the bridge. The smaller diameter of a true cable under simple tension creates less hurricane wind force under live load conditions. 100-150-200 feet of 8 inch pipe at 20 to 23 pounds per foot = added dead weight on each connection point in each truss, rather than a simple true cable stay that is lifting the walkway at the same point.
The pipe (fake) cable un-stays are themselves heavy and have mass and wind resistance. As long round objects in the unpredictable gusty winds of a hurricane, this round shape creates a near-maximum turbulence and whipping load in a hurricane, and this extra load must be added to their gravity load under wind conditions = heavier, more expensive bridge = greater profits for the brddige design team, right?
So, regardless of claim as decorative devices, there are gravity loads, extra stress, and extra un-symmetric stresses added to each connection point of every member. Forget the cost and time of the claimed "decorative" tower and its cable un-stays: The tower itself and its cable un-stays add dead weight to the walkway, add hurricane wind loadings to the walkway at each connectino point, and create even worse cases of the very conditions a true cable-stayed bridge is intended to reduce and support.