HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2501  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2018, 1:25 PM
peg peg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Authentic_City View Post
There was a recent discussion about this in the Facebook group "Manitoba History: A Public Discussion Forum of the MHS".

Built 1907-1908 for the Canadian Northern Railway, it also accommodated pedestrian and vehicular traffic until 1935-36 when the first span of the St. James bridge was opened.

Steamboat traffic on the Assiniboine seems to have ended in 1885, but Federal legislation regulating 'navigable waterways' required swingbridges well after this time. I don't believe this bridge was ever opened. As mentioned, it accommodated streetcars at one time. It is still privately owned by a retired architect (Alec Katz), but there appears to be no plans to do anything with it (like turn it into condos).
Great info, thanks! Its too bad that condo project never went through. I found some of the plans and renders of it and it seemed like a really neat idea.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2502  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2018, 2:25 PM
Curmudgeon Curmudgeon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 148
Interesting that the rights of way for future streets had been cleared. Looks like Kenaston south of Tuxedo (or was Tuxedo still called Van Horne?) was a mud road!

Centennial and Beaverbrook Streets look to be already somewhat developed but yet there's nothing to the east. I wonder if that's due to to the early streetcar service that accessed Tuxedo (and Charleswood) via that bridge. Right around the time of these photos the Academy Road line was extended to Doncaster and service over the bridge was discontinued. I guess increased auto traffic was resulting in streetcar traffic becoming unsafe over a narrow bridge, and then of course with no Polo Park there was no reason to need to go over that bridge when you could get downtown via Academy and the Maryland Bridge.

Trolleybuses ran out that way too, Academy-Edgeland buses turned around at Tuxedo and Edgeland, The loop is still there.

Awesome photos!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2503  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2018, 3:30 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by WpG_GuY View Post
Does anyone know why the office tower at 220 Portage sits on the podium at an angle?


https://scontent.fybz2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...20&oe=5BB4BCD9
Makes a better windbreak for Portage and Main!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2504  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2018, 4:34 PM
BubberMiley BubberMiley is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by peg View Post
Does anyone have any information on the old train bridge in the background? I know it was a part of the Oak Point Subdivision and was abandoned by CN in the early 2000's. And used to have a streetcar line cross over it too. I also know it is a swing bridge as I have been on the bridge and seen the old gears and stuff. I have tried to find out when it was built and if it ever actually swung but can't find anything.
My dad took this picture of it in about 1938.
[IMG][/IMG]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2505  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2018, 4:40 PM
Andy6's Avatar
Andy6 Andy6 is offline
Starring as himself
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto Yorkville
Posts: 7,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by alittle1 View Post
Makes a better windbreak for Portage and Main!
View of Portage and Main plus it was fashionable and modern.
__________________
crispy crunchy light and snappy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2506  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2018, 8:31 PM
peg peg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubberMiley View Post
My dad took this picture of it in about 1938.
[IMG][/IMG]
Very cool! Thank you!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2507  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2018, 8:50 PM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cobourg, ON/Mesa, AZ
Posts: 3,432
Wow lots of river there.
__________________
Get off my lawn.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2508  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2018, 10:58 PM
Authentic_City's Avatar
Authentic_City Authentic_City is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,202
^cool photo! Thanks for sharing. Must be shortly after spring break up? Looks like ice in the distance near the CPR bridge at Omand’s Creek.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2509  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2018, 3:53 PM
alittle1 alittle1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubberMiley View Post
My dad took this picture of it in about 1938.
[IMG][/IMG]
It is very unlikely that this bridge would swing, based on the central pivot (which is anchored in bedrock at this location) is not high enough to support the two bridge girder spans, namely because of height and girth of the central pivot. More than likely, the engineer who drew the plan knew the bridge would never be open ( Federal regulations stipulated that all bridges must open to allow vessels to pass through), and was designed to have the appearance that it would open.

A properly functioning swing bridge would have a more substanstial central pivot base and a larger ring gear system, like you would see on CPR's Bergen Cutoff bridge. ( https://vimeo.com/205111337)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2510  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2018, 4:14 PM
buzzg buzzg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by WpG_GuY View Post
Does anyone know why the office tower at 220 Portage sits on the podium at an angle?


https://scontent.fybz2-1.fna.fbcdn.n...20&oe=5BB4BCD9
It's because Portage was built at an angle compared to the rest of the street grid – buildings downtown are built parallel to the N-S streets. If you look at Newport Centre, the whole building is built like this, with the flat edge along Hargrave. Because of Portage's angle, no large squared building could ever be flush to all sides, so it makes sense to have it off-line at 1 place instead of 3, and makes more sense to have the extra space on Portage as opposed to the side streets or weird angles in the back lanes.

For 220, if the building followed the Portage angle instead of Fort, it would have to be smaller as otherwise the building would hang over the property line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2511  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2018, 5:26 PM
peg peg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by alittle1 View Post
It is very unlikely that this bridge would swing, based on the central pivot (which is anchored in bedrock at this location) is not high enough to support the two bridge girder spans, namely because of height and girth of the central pivot. More than likely, the engineer who drew the plan knew the bridge would never be open ( Federal regulations stipulated that all bridges must open to allow vessels to pass through), and was designed to have the appearance that it would open.

A properly functioning swing bridge would have a more substanstial central pivot base and a larger ring gear system, like you would see on CPR's Bergen Cutoff bridge. ( https://vimeo.com/205111337)
The bridge does have gears and mechanism under the deck though, there's a cool sitting place on one of the concrete supports where you can see the rusty gears and cogs and stuff and how it would have "unlocked" to open. I cant see a reason why they would have opened it but i just find it so fascinating!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2512  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2018, 6:55 PM
wardlow's Avatar
wardlow wardlow is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzg View Post
It's because Portage was built at an angle compared to the rest of the street grid – buildings downtown are built parallel to the N-S streets. If you look at Newport Centre, the whole building is built like this, with the flat edge along Hargrave. Because of Portage's angle, no large squared building could ever be flush to all sides, so it makes sense to have it off-line at 1 place instead of 3, and makes more sense to have the extra space on Portage as opposed to the side streets or weird angles in the back lanes.

For 220, if the building followed the Portage angle instead of Fort, it would have to be smaller as otherwise the building would hang over the property line.
I think it's more just a matter of Modernist design, where there's less importance of having the building elevations conform to the property edges. Buildings could stand out and "relieve" the "monotony" of a hard urban edge by being set at different angles, while also creating more ordered floorplans by avoiding oblique angles. It's not a necessity. Remember that basically every building on Portage Avenue built before 1945 conformed to the oblique angles caused by the surveys of the Portage trail and the HBC Reserve subdivision.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2513  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2018, 9:07 PM
Wolf13 Wolf13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by wardlow View Post
I think it's more just a matter of Modernist design, where there's less importance of having the building elevations conform to the property edges. Buildings could stand out and "relieve" the "monotony" of a hard urban edge by being set at different angles, while also creating more ordered floorplans by avoiding oblique angles. It's not a necessity. Remember that basically every building on Portage Avenue built before 1945 conformed to the oblique angles caused by the surveys of the Portage trail and the HBC Reserve subdivision.
True, but also because it's cheaper to build a square than a, well, non-square...

So they picked to be parallel with Fort rather than Portage. Agreeably likely for design concerns you mentioned.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:49 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.