Ideas/Visions for Ottawa, Canada's Capital

[Fatty McButterpants]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

And what genious ideas have you posted @fattymcbutterpants ? Other than replacing the Alexandria Bridge, diddly squad. So I would try to come up with ideas myself and post them if I were you before just criticizing the ones posted on here...

Yes I posted one idea, and it was a pretty bold one if I do say so myself. Agree with it or not, it would be a game changer. And if you don't agree with it, that's fine. And if you want to engage in a spirited debate about it, that's great. And if you want to criticize it, I can take it.

By the way, are you criticizing me for the quantity ideas I have posted? If so, can you explain how that's any holier that my criticism of the quality of ideas that have been posted? Yes, I am a bit of a troll. But you sir are a bit of a hypocrite.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

Yes I posted one idea, and it was a pretty bold one if I do say so myself. Agree with it or not, it would be a game changer.

What game would it change (for the better)?

[Fatty McButterpants]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

What game would it change (for the better)?

If you woke up tomorrow and the Alexandra was magically replaced with a magnificent new suspension bridge, would you notice? I suspect you would. I think everyone in the city would. Even the most inattentive and apathetic person in this region woud notice instantly. The game that would change would be the identifiable landscape of the city. That's what was meant by "game changer". Geez.

For the better? Well I think so, but that's up for debate. If you can handle it.

I'm starting to wonder who's the troll here.

[OTSkyline]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

Yes I posted one idea, and it was a pretty bold one if I do say so myself. Agree with it or not, it would be a game changer. And if you don't agree with it, that's fine. And if you want to engage in a spirited debate about it, that's great. And if you want to criticize it, I can take it.

By the way, are you criticizing me for the quantity ideas I have posted? If so, can you explain how that's any holier that my criticism of the quality of ideas that have been posted? Yes, I am a bit of a troll. But you sir are a bit of a hypocrite.

Well according to you, there weren't many other good "ideas" thrown around. This leaves the impression that there are many ideas or projects that could be done in Ottawa to make it better, not solely a new bridge. And since you only posted about the bridge it means you are waiting for others to contribute and come up with these great ideas instead of posting others yourself...

I, personally, like the idea of revamping or getting a new modern bridge downtown, but you can't honestly say that a new bridge would be the only thing Ottawa needs to become this grand vibrant Canadian capital for canadians, residents and tourists...

[spotlight]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

If you woke up tomorrow and the Alexandra was magically replaced with a magnificent new suspension bridge, would you notice? I suspect you would. I think everyone in the city would. Even the most inattentive and apathetic person in this region woud notice instantly. The game that would change would be the identifiable landscape of the city. That's what was meant by "game changer". Geez.

For the better? Well I think so, but that's up for debate. If you can handle it.

I'm starting to wonder who's the troll here.

Here's my take on what you're proposing... i don't think that anyone would disagree that having a beautiful suspension bridge or a beautifully designed new bridge would be bad.. I think the fact that you're proposing the change to be Alexandra is what people have trouble with.

As far as bridges go ... Alexandra is the only (downtown/core connecting) bridge that has any visual merit.

I'm not saying it's a perfect bridge it would need some touching up but it's a classic bridge and many people would prefer it being touched up/improved on as opposed to changing it completely.

Now... if you told me you wanted the MacDonald-Cartier bridge change to a grand bridge i'd say yes in a split second .. or portage or chaudiere (not that those two last ones have the same impact or structural need) but all of our interprovincial bridges other than Alexandra are absolutely boring: Champlain = boring, portage = boring , chadiere = boring, macdonald-cartier = boring ... Alexandra = classic/interesting/ it's the closest thing we have to grand.

there are other bridges in the city (non interprovincial or non automobile) that have style merit but not when it comes to inter provincial.

[Mikeed]

The Royal Alexandra Bridge is picturesque example of the steel truss cantilever bridge. It is over 100 years old & at the time of construction in 1900 it was the longest bridge in Canada.

It advocate it's destruction on the subjective grounds that suspension or cable stayed bridges (new bridge technology) are more attractive to the eye is to advocate for warrantless destruction in the name of 'newness'; and nothing more.

The Royal Alexandra Bridge is a gem of this city and is deeply connected to the history of the region having once been a CPR rail link to the Union Station.

The (IMO) beautiful steel cantilever design is elegant and adds to the epicness of the vista our city & capital viewed from the river.

I argue that a cantilever design fits in with the wild environment of the hill and rapids of the Ottawa river, plus the architecture of Parliament and Connaught & Chateau more than any other bridge design.

[S-Man]

The Royal Alexandra Bridge is picturesque example of the steel truss cantilever bridge. It is over 100 years old & at the time of construction in 1900 it was the longest bridge in Canada.

It advocate it's destruction on the subjective grounds that suspension or cable stayed bridges (new bridge technology) are more attractive to the eye is to advocate for warrantless destruction in the name of 'newness'; and nothing more.

Thank you - very well said!

The Alexandra is a marvel of its time and was a big deal back in the day. If anyone wants to blow up the Macdonald-Cartier bridge, I'd pay to be first in line to press the button.

[Dado]

I like the Alexandra Bridge, but one thing that has bugged me about it for a long time is the "unbalanced" nature of the bridge on the north side - there's an extra two truss spans there that the Ottawa side doesn't have. My guess is that it's related to where the deepest part of the river is located.

I wouldn't be averse to replacing those two truss spans with something else so that what we're left with is a more symmetric bridge for its truss spans.

[S-Man]

For a full accounting of the bridge's construction (with pics!), check out this web page:

http://www.railways.incanada.net/Art...cle2001_1.html

One interesting fact was that the bridge was hit by a tornado in September, 1900, shortly before it opened.

[Buggys]

Instead of replacing an existing bridge, how about build magnificent new ones or rehab the Prince of Wales one. Heck, there can even be a design competition to raise the profile of those bridges!

[Fatty McButterpants]

Originally Posted by Mikeed

The Royal Alexandra Bridge is picturesque example of the steel truss cantilever bridge. It is over 100 years old & at the time of construction in 1900 it was the longest bridge in Canada.

It advocate it's destruction on the subjective grounds that suspension or cable stayed bridges (new bridge technology) are more attractive to the eye is to advocate for warrantless destruction in the name of 'newness'; and nothing more.

The Royal Alexandra Bridge is a gem of this city and is deeply connected to the history of the region having once been a CPR rail link to the Union Station.

The (IMO) beautiful steel cantilever design is elegant and adds to the epicness of the vista our city & capital viewed from the river.

I argue that a cantilever design fits in with the wild environment of the hill and rapids of the Ottawa river, plus the architecture of Parliament and Connaught & Chateau more than any other bridge design.

" ... advocate for warrantless destruction in the name of 'newness'; and nothing more."

?????? wha ?????

First of all I am not advocating for the "destruction" of anything. I'm just presenting a vision for a structure that at some point will either need major repairs/upgrades or ... brace for it ... replacement. You do realize that these inevitabilities rank up there with death and taxes, right? You also realize that you need to choose one I hope.

And the suggestion that I am presenting this "in the name of newness and nothing more" is nothing more than suppository. Is the current functionality of the bridge adequate for future needs? One lane of traffic in each direction? (actually I would consider the Quebec-bound lane to be half a lane due to the terror factor involved). Pedestrian and cyclist traffic on one side only? You don't think that will be the subject of expensive modifications at some point? Interprovincial traffic probably won't be easing up over the next 25-50 years, I don't think. One lane in each direction? Forever???

Have you considered the escalating maintenance and repair costs associated with this very old and underperforming structure?

And finally IMO it's ugly (you have your opinion, I have mine). It's not unique (that's a fact - I've seen hundreds of these). It will not meet future needs. It will become very expensive to preserve. All that said, maybe the notion of replacement isn't so evil after all.

[J.OT13]

I respect your opinion, but I still don't agree. If we ever reach the bridge's capacity in terms of vehicular traffic, I would much rather convert it back to a rail bridge in the for of rapid transit. It's not like you can build a wider bridge anyway; there's no room on the Ottawa side to widen the streets in which the bridges traffic converge.

And again, I respect that you find the bridge ugly, but do you not think that other bridges are as bad aesthetically, if not worse?

[Fatty McButterpants]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I respect your opinion, but I still don't agree. If we ever reach the bridge's capacity in terms of vehicular traffic, I would much rather convert it back to a rail bridge in the for of rapid transit. It's not like you can build a wider bridge anyway; there's no room on the Ottawa side to widen the streets in which the bridges traffic converge.

And again, I respect that you find the bridge ugly, but do you not think that other bridges are as bad aesthetically, if not worse?

Yes, of course there other local bridges that are worse. Much worse actually.

So why target the Alexandra in a thread about visions for the capital? Three words: location, location, location. It is the most prominently situated for a beautiful landmark bridge. If you want to replace all the ugly bridges with slick new ones, fine by me. But if you can only pick one to replace - I say the Alexandra.

... I wish someone with some photoshop skills would get on this

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

Yes, of course there other local bridges that are worse. Much worse actually.

So why target the Alexandra in a thread about visions for the capital? Three words: location, location, location. It is the most prominently situated for a beautiful landmark bridge. If you want to replace all the ugly bridges with slick new ones, fine by me. But if you can only pick one to replace - I say the Alexandra.

... I wish someone with some photoshop skills would get on this

If there is one bridge to replace, it is the MacDonald-Cartier bridge. It has absolutely no aesthetic merit and the traffic it produces rots much of Lower Town.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

If you woke up tomorrow and the Alexandra was magically replaced with a magnificent new suspension bridge, would you notice? I suspect you would. I think everyone in the city would. Even the most inattentive and apathetic person in this region woud notice instantly. The game that would change would be the identifiable landscape of the city. That's what was meant by "game changer". Geez.

Apart from looking right purrrttty, what would change?

[Fatty McButterpants]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Apart from looking right purrrttty, what would change?

Nice troll. Okay I'll bite.

Apart from looking completely different and transforming the cityscape and waterway, it could (would) also improve functionality (presumably more lanes, better walkways, cycling paths, etc). Aesthetics. Functionality. Um .....

... are you serious?

I guess I don't understand questions that answer themselves. They are usually the hallmark of a troll. I would know.

[Uhuniau]

My big ideas:

- Trains back to Union Station. Cut and cover Colonel Driveby. Yes, it's expensive and messy. Do it.

- Get rid of the central Queensway. Bury the thing, from about Lees/Hurdman west to Parkdale. Build useful and productive green/open spaces, halls, museums, galleries, commercial spaces, over the buried freeway.

- O-Train into Gatineau. Start with Hull. By December. Of this year.

- Kill of Harper's dumbass monument to Communism and build the new Justice/Court building between the Supreme Court lawn and the National Library. Holt-style.

- Bring the Holt Plan up to date, and build new buildings downtown according to that.

- Rideau-Montreal LRT sooner, not later. Do it as a PPP, and let it capture LRT-related TOD tax revenues until the capital cost is paid off.

- Blow up the NAC and replace it with a new NAC that isn't a 1960s piece of brutalist crap.

- Blow up most buildings at Carleton and start over, for the same reason.

- Restore the cottage village that was destroyed to make the precious precious Ottawa River Parkway.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Fatty McButterpants

Nice troll. Okay I'll bite.

Apart from looking completely different and transforming the cityscape and waterway, it could (would) also improve functionality (presumably more lanes, better walkways, cycling paths, etc). Aesthetics. Functionality. Um .....

... are you serious?

I guess I don't understand questions that answer themselves. They are usually the hallmark of a troll. I would know.

Better, how? I have no problems walking across the bridge. Would it shorten the width of the river? Cut out the winter wind and brutal summer sun?

[Fatty McButterpants]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Better, how? I have no problems walking across the bridge. Would it shorten the width of the river? Cut out the winter wind and brutal summer sun?

And there we go ladies and gentlemen. The fuddy duddy mentality. Why dream big? Hey, it's good enough. It'll do.

So inspirational.

[Urbanarchit]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

My big ideas:

- Get rid of the central Queensway. Bury the thing, from about Lees/Hurdman west to Parkdale. Build useful and productive green/open spaces, halls, museums, galleries, commercial spaces, over the buried freeway.

- Bring the Holt Plan up to date, and build new buildings downtown according to that.

- Blow up the NAC and replace it with a new NAC that isn't a 1960s piece of brutalist crap.

I hope they could at least bury it just past Churchill, around Boyd or Maitland. When it gets to Westgage/Hampton it cuts Carling and forces it to bifurcate to go in different directions. Then there's the industrial area West of that. That entire area could have some nice retrofitting.



What's the Holt plan?

I kind of like the NAC (not the Rideau Canal or Elgin façade). It would just be better someplace else, surrounded by highrises in a non-prominent location.