Peace Bridge | 131 Meter Span | Completed

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

is it structurally impossible, or the fact that gravity would be pulling damn hard on the middle of the bridge trying to pull it down into the water since it's unbalanced?

I guess what I mean is, would the point of failure be where it attaches to the shoreline.

The helical shape probably loses it's strength with that much of a curve for one, especially a horizontal curve.

Second of all, the forces on the abutments would be huge, twisting, lifting, etc. The abutments would likely be 10 times (or more) larger and more expensive than the straight version.

Like someone else said, bridges that are curved like that, pretty much have to have something balancing the weight on the other side.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Wooster

No doubt. A good chunk of people in general are pretty stupid, not matter what the angle of their opinion, particularly on newsmedia message boards.

Fully 50% of people are below average intelligence.

And as I've pointed out before, when it comes to the overwhelming majority of people who call into radio shows, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel. The Herald comments in large part share a similar tone to what you hear on radio shows.

[You Need A Thneed]

Global actually read on the air a viewers comment yesterday that I will paraphrase here:

"I won't be walking across the bridge because of all the dark hiding spaces where an undesirable could jump me from."

Really? A well lit straight, flat, open bridge has dark hiding places? Or are these undesirables going to be hanging off the side of the bridge just to wait for people to jump?

Totally moronic. Global, if you are going to read comments on the air, at least pick the well thought out ones.

[Bigtime]

The media made up their mind a long time ago how they were going to play this story. They aren't going to change now. They'd look as foolish as that New Brunswick paper that fabricated the entire Stephen Harper "wafergate" story!

[mwalker_mw]

The bridge itself really is quite striking - both technically and aesthetically.

I do feel that the approaches on either side could use some work to make it feel more integrated as well as improving flow. The exits right now seem like they will cause numerous bottlenecks as cyclists and pedestrians combine - I would think one would want a taper in and out of the bridge and the circle area on the South side is just asking for trouble. Going beyond function, it would be nice if the colouring and structural elements were to flow out into the pathways on either sides, perhaps helical brick patterns with red & white tones or something similar. Having such a visually striking structure flow out onto bare asphalt seems like a really poor choice. Right now it feels like it is a foreign object sitting on top of the landscape rather than becoming part of it.

All in all very nice though.

[Bigtime]

I'm thinking that the pathway connections are not going to be as the appear in the renderings, since they came from Calatrava and his focus was the bridge. I'm sure the city has plans for a better integration of the pathways to the bridge openings.

[Ramsayfarian]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

1) Transportation saw a need for the bridge based on traffic studies - the same type of studies that determined the need for Stoney Trail, the interchanges over Crowchild, the interchange on Elbow over Glenmore. Its not driven by Bronco, at least not initially.

2) Transportation makes all the decisions based on location and then coordinates with the Parks department and Water Resources probably. They need to get approvals from Navigation Canada, Department of Fisheries as well - this is why the lack of piers is so important, as is the fact they won't be in the river at all during construction.

3) Who knows - certainly based on reputation and built work, I doubt there is an architect who knows bridges better than Calatrava - that means globally

4) I assume all the decision makers at the City saw the design and made sure it met those initial limitations (ie lack of piers, height limits, budget)...Of course this PASSED city council at a vote of 10-3 I believe...more like 10-2 because Blinky McIvor will vote against anything.

5) Not sure, but I imagine it will come out at sometime...probably will leak from McIvorite's office.

Seriously, the notion that someone in Calgary could do this is laughable...no way...I work in the profession; I know the players...Something like this would not be possible. The proof will be the competition for the next pedestrian bridge - the gaunlet has been thrown down and I am afraid most architects in Calgary (not all certainly, maybe 2 or 3 firms could come up with something interesting) would fall short. Afterall, architects are not engineers...bridges are engineering. Calatrava just happens to be a guy that is a PhD in Engineering and an architect...that's the difference.

Thanks for answering my questions.

I'm also looking forward to seeing the renderings for the second bridge.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Ramsayfarian

Thanks for answering my questions.

I'm also looking forward to seeing the renderings for the second bridge.

no worries...

we'll see how this plays out, as that will have an impact on the second bridge and associated competition I would imagine.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

[SIZE="6"]
_________________________________________________________________

Good article and we finally get to hear from Calatrava himself on the design and influences for the bridge.

I have a question for you oldschool, since you are in the industry as you have stated before. Does the architect Ron Goodfellow at the end of the article have any ability to have designed something like this?

Well, let's put it this way, if one is vetting architects based on what they have done, Goodfellow is hardly someone you would name out of Calgary has having the ability of doing something memorable.

There are some architects, who people on this forum, can name right off the bat for doing innovative work. I had to Google this Goodfellow guy...

It sounds snobby, but the awards and publications are the true test of any architects design ability...Has Goodfellow been in Canadian Architect? Azure? Has he won any design awards?

There's a reason why Calatrava is a globally renown architect; he's goooood. If the architects in Calgary were so good, they'd be building, like, outside of Calgary.

Don't get me wrong, there are a few architecture firms I think that have that potential to do something very good, but not something like Calatrava. What would be more difficult is the engineering - the guys here struggle with elegant engineering. The trees on Stephen Ave show that - it is way over engineered.

[ByeByeBaby]

Yesterday, when I first saw the renderings, I liked it a fair bit.

It's improved a bit in my mind: a striking bridge isn't all that difficult to design. A beautiful bridge is a fair bit harder. This one is elegant, which may be the hardest of all.

[Plenitude]

I think what I most appreciate Calatrava for with the design of the bridge, aside from the technicality of the structure, which is very impressive...is that I really feel he imagined and got a sense of what it would be like to USE the bridge.

From all the renderings, to me the one looking from inside out is one of the most striking. I can't wait to be inside that bridge. As someone mentioned, I'm imagining back to childhood and Star Wars days. Won't it be kind of cool to bring back some...I don't know, imagination and creativity to our adult lives?

Not only that, but I've crossed on the Prince's Island bridge many times in -30 plus wind chill and I would NEVER want some winding, twisting bridge that took any longer than absolutely necessary for me to cross. As Calatrava mentions, while here he saw people jogging around in (what he diplomatically termed) "inhospitable" conditions, it sounds like he designed a structure with its use in the freezing-ass Winter (a lot of the year here) in mind. The cycling lane and the walking pathways...there are so many elements to the bridge that are going to benefit its users (I do think the entrances are a bit abrupt, but that can hopefully be worked on).

feel that the design of the bridge is striking, functional and does fit with Calgary in many ways, contrary to the opinion of that Calgary architect quoted in the article---besides, if it were to "fit" with what Calgary is, it would have painted, stamped concrete fishies, or buffalo. I, for one, am up for something a little different.

Thank you Calatrava for understanding the bridge not only from a design perspective (because from a structural and design standpoint IMHO it stands out), but also most importantly from the standpoint of the people who will be using the bridge. This is not just a fancy showpiece bridge (as the naysayers are calling it), its functionality and the atmosphere created inside the bridge are some of its best features in my opinion.

[O-tacular]

So I tried to post a counter point to all the rambling, whiny old people on the CTV site, and I guess it wasn;t approved. My commentary was actually less offensive than all the nay-sayers'. I guess unless you're against it they won;t give you press.

[Grendel]

A lot will depend upon how the City keeps it up. My first thought was that the red paint is going to look shitty if it's allowed to fade, and that the interior is going to be a magnet for graffiti. The thing about these bridges in Europe is that they exist for the most part in bustling city centres where people are using them at all hours. Calgary's city centre, sadly, is a vacant wasteland between 5 PM and 6 AM and our parks are empty at all hours between September and mid-June. During these times it's going to be a hell of a challenge for the city to keep this gem looking clean and inviting. After all, this is a city where one of the civic sports is to get drunk and smash glass bus shelters.
Having said that, I think it's beautiful in the rendering. Like so much else, the finished product will depend a lot upon the quality of materials used. I think it's a step in the right direction for Calgary towards a future where people make better use of the city's public spaces, but I fear we're a long way off yet, as evidenced by the debate that went on surrounding this bridge.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

So I tried to post a counter point to all the rambling, whiny old people on the CTV site, and I guess it wasn;t approved. My commentary was actually less offensive than all the nay-sayers'. I guess unless you're against it they won;t give you press.

"Things are fine and everyone's happy" doesn't sell eyeballs. Never has, never will. As with any news story, tone down the negativity about 50% for the true story.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by Grendel

A lot will depend upon how the City keeps it up. My first thought was that the red paint is going to look shitty if it's allowed to fade, and that the interior is going to be a magnet for graffiti. The thing about these bridges in Europe is that they exist for the most part in bustling city centres where people are using them at all hours. Calgary's city centre, sadly, is a vacant wasteland between 5 PM and 6 AM and our parks are empty at all hours between September and mid-June. During these times it's going to be a hell of a challenge for the city to keep this gem looking clean and inviting. After all, this is a city where one of the civic sports is to get drunk and smash glass bus shelters.
Having said that, I think it's beautiful in the rendering. Like so much else, the finished product will depend a lot upon the quality of materials used. I think it's a step in the right direction for Calgary towards a future where people make better use of the city's public spaces, but I fear we're a long way off yet, as evidenced by the debate that went on surrounding this bridge.

All bridges need some maintenance work. Unpainted concrete needs maintenance from time to time.

Sure it might have to be painted every few years, but every bridge is going to need a little painting every few years, no matter what the colour or the material is.

It's made of steel, steel needs fresh paint every once in a while anyway. The bridge isn't going to sit there with the paint fading for 25 years.

[Fiveway]

An Allegorical Tale Pertaining To Civic Politics and Bridges

You need a car and you whine to Dad to buy you one until he relents. He gives you his Platinum card and tells you buy what you need. You and your friends head straight to the Audi dealership and sit in the R8. Damn, yo. Your friend Blinky starts ragging on you and you start to feel a bit guilty. So you go to the Chevy dealership and sit in an Aveo. You begin to wonder if you need an R8, or if an Aveo will do the trick. It dawns on you that you could buy 10 Aveos for the price of an R8. You could give one to all your friends! Or you could buy 1 Aveo and spend the rest on crack. So what do you do?

If you buy the R8 you’re a selfish prick.

If you buy 10 Aveos for all your friends, you’ll be stuck driving an Aveo -- exactly like all your buddies -- until Dad ponies up for a new car, which might be never. And you’ll be a communist.

If you buy one Aveo and a lot of crack you’ll end up broke in rehab and still have a shitty car.

The moral of the story? I’m a selfish prick and Calgary is full of Aveo-driving crackheads.

[korzym]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Fully 50% of people are below average intelligence.

And as I've pointed out before, when it comes to the overwhelming majority of people who call into radio shows, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel. The Herald comments in large part share a similar tone to what you hear on radio shows.

this is not only at you freeweed, but many here are now bashing the intelligence of those that give the news their feedback:

Their votes at the end of the day.

How do you think repeating "change" and "yes we can" got bam bam elected in the u.s.? Intelligence is something important I agree, but what makes sense to you won't make sense to everyone. Seems like most people are ticked off over this bridge.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by korzym

this is not only at you freeweed, but many here are now bashing the intelligence of those that give the news their feedback:

Their votes at the end of the day.

How do you think repeating "change" and "yes we can" got bam bam elected in the u.s.? Intelligence is something important I agree, but what makes sense to you won't make sense to everyone. Seems like most people are ticked off over this bridge.

I think some of the generalising has a point. When a forumer like Wooster goes on to one of the sites and posts a well worded non-confrontational message in support of the bridge and gets lambasted as a "left wing spammer" I think we can quickly see the intelligence of most people posting on there.

Does that make all of us on here (including yourself) absolutely brilliant in comparison? Of course not. At least here we seem to be able to engage in some healthy dialogue without resorting to the crap that gets thrown around on those boards.

In 5 years will people still be upset about this bridge? I doubt it.

[korzym]

Originally Posted by Grendel

A lot will depend upon how the City keeps it up. My first thought was that the red paint is going to look shitty if it's allowed to fade, and that the interior is going to be a magnet for graffiti. The thing about these bridges in Europe is that they exist for the most part in bustling city centres where people are using them at all hours. Calgary's city centre, sadly, is a vacant wasteland between 5 PM and 6 AM and our parks are empty at all hours between September and mid-June. During these times it's going to be a hell of a challenge for the city to keep this gem looking clean and inviting. After all, this is a city where one of the civic sports is to get drunk and smash glass bus shelters.
Having said that, I think it's beautiful in the rendering. Like so much else, the finished product will depend a lot upon the quality of materials used. I think it's a step in the right direction for Calgary towards a future where people make better use of the city's public spaces, but I fear we're a long way off yet, as evidenced by the debate that went on surrounding this bridge.

dont take this the wrong way, but you sound like your a strong member of the NIMBY group that doesn't want bars DT but yet you complain about DT being vacant at night.

I don't think you can afford to be so picky, if you want more people to come to DT at all hours. Wait until it's always packed at the very least, then start picking on groups, [note i don't believe in government having this power to begin with]

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by korzym

this is not only at you freeweed, but many here are now bashing the intelligence of those that give the news their feedback:

Their votes at the end of the day.

How do you think repeating "change" and "yes we can" got bam bam elected in the u.s.? Intelligence is something important I agree, but what makes sense to you won't make sense to everyone. Seems like most people are ticked off over this bridge.

Did you actually just say that?! Wow! Do yourself and everyone else a favour and crawl back to the cave you came from. Your opinion is literally worth less than dirt to me now.