[Old Johnson Street Bridge] Design and technical discussion

[mat]

Originally Posted by Caramia

I just finished looking through MMM's bridge portfolio and I am heartbroken. Not a single one of them has an ounce of iconic presence, let alone artistic beauty. If council wants to tear down our beautiful blue bridge and replace it with a featureless flat utilitarian structure, I guess they hired the right people. But there is nothing here that shows any poetry at all.

I beg someone to find something that shows me different.


http://www.mmm.ca/projects/Projects.aspx

Reading the press release the wording was not entirely clear as to MMM actually having already submitted a design, or overseeing a design process from another firm, or themselves, with 'consultation' from the citizen's advisory committee.

Valued at $3.2 million, the engineering firm MMM Group Limited was awarded the contract to project manage
the bridge replacement project at a Special Council meeting this afternoon. MMM Group provides engineering
expertise in managing bridge construction, with previous experience designing and managing completion of 12
moving bridges. In addition to engineering expertise, consultants include an architectural and sustainability
design team. A focus on sustainability and design components early in the process will provide greater
certainty and reduced risk to the project.
“The bridge is a symbol of both form and function and requires a proven firm that is familiar with successfully
delivering design-build projects and in particular moving bridges,” added Fortin. “The submission by MMM
Group demonstrates an extensive breadth of knowledge and experience in bridge construction and brings a
focus on sustainability and aesthetic that is extremely important to this Council and to this community,”

This is what really riles me about the process - we should have a design competition, and include submissions from around the world. Some new bridge builds in Europe and Asia have incredible combinations of form and function.

The question everyone should be asking is how could council approve a company which highlights those bridge projects as examples. Caramia is totally correct - none of those could be labelled iconic.

[Baro]

Ah but we have a heritage expert on this project! It means we'll get some red brick veneer on the ends of the bridge!

[Phil McAvity]

Originally Posted by Mike K.

While community input is important, Mayor Dean Fortin said time is running out.“We don’t have months for public consultation, we have months to build a bridge,” said Fortin.

I like how Fortin here pays lip service to community input when I don't recall there being any on the issue of replacing the bridge but the minute some private developer comes forth with development plans, community input is critical as are the months wasted wading through miles of red tape.

Am I the only person here in favour of replacement?

[AnonAnnie2]

Originally Posted by VicHockeyFan

I make $3.2M spending decisions over lunch almost daily.

and what do you do the other days?

lol

[Mike K.]

Councillor Madoff believes we should entice MMM Group to complete the project on time and on budget.

Ontario firm to design new Blue Bridge
Goldstream News Gazette
Published: July 30, 2009 1:00 PM

The project manager for P.E.I.’s Confederation Bridge will guide the design and construction of Victoria’s Johnson Street Bridge.

After reviewing six bids for the job, city staff selected Ontario-based MMM Group Ltd. for a contract estimated at $3.2 million.

MMM Group is an Ontario-based company that has designed 12 moveable bridges and managed the $1.2 billion Confederation bridge that links P.E.I. to the mainland.

The company will be responsible for designing Victoria’s new $63-million bridge, and overseeing the contractors chosen to build it.

At a special council meeting July 24, Coun. John Luton asked that social considerations, such as fair wages and First Nations apprenticeships, be prioritized in the project. Coun. Pam Maddoff asked if MMM Group could be awarded a bonus as incentive to deliver the project on time and on budget.

Also giving input to the design will be a newly-appointed citizens’ advisory group, selected for their expertise in areas such as heritage, sustainability and architecture.

Former Saanich South MLA David Cubberley was appointed to the eight-member group (CONFIRM), which met for the first time July 24.

“It’s very exciting ... to be able to advocate solutions for walkers and cyclists and make sure transit is integrated as well,” Cubberley said.

Also selected are Joe Van Belleghem of Dockside Green, Sid Chow of Chow Low Hammond Architects and Allison Ashcroft, founder of VIVO, a green materials supplier.

In April, council voted to replace rather than renovate the 85-year-old Johnson Street Bridge.

http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver.../52087002.html

[G-Man]

I have heard of bonuses for exceeding timelines and objectives but usually you don't get a bonus for doing what you said you would do. That would be inane.

"I asked you to write a 1200 word essay and you did. It only deserves a B- but because you met the objectives I will give you an A+."

[Mike K.]

Anyone see the irony of Victoria's heritage advocate numero uno trying to rush the replacement of one of the City's most iconic heritage landmarks?

When VV was first launched, the people who participated in discussions on the forum were labeled as skyscraper junkies, destroyers of heritage and haters of everything that made Victoria Victoria. Funny how VV's membership includes some of the most passionate heritage advocates and most vocal individuals set against the replacement of the bridge, meanwhile the traditional heritage groups and supporters thereof are silent and/or are pledging support for replacing the bridge.

So what are we to be labeled as now? The people trying to keep Victoria a backwater?

[martini]

^ I don't know, but I'm seriously shaking my head at this point.

[VicHockeyFan]

Originally Posted by SusanJones

and what do you do the other days?

lol

Pull the wings off flies.



http://images.google.ca/imgres?imgur...E9vV-QbK8e2CDw

[aastra]

So what are we to be labeled as now?

Easy. We're pro "bad" development and they're pro "good" development.

Replacing parking lots with homes, shops, and hotels is bad development.

Replacing historic bridges and re-routing roads and streets is good development.

I'm all but convinced now that the automobile is still ruling the day in Victoria. Think about it. Opponents of the arena went on and on about traffic nightmares and insufficient on-site parking. Any and every proposal that was slated to replace a parking lot was maligned, regardless of how big the proposal was, how tall it was, what it looked like, etc.

And yet it's okay to demolish a historic bridge. It's not just okay, it's terrific. In fact, it's such a terrific idea that we should even consider giving the bridge builder a bonus just for participating in the project. Why? Is it because we're talking about cars instead of about homes and shops and hotels? Because we're striving for a little slice of motoring utopia? Straighter roads, quieter bridge surfaces, and so forth?

[Phil McAvity]

Originally Posted by VicHockeyFan

Pull the wings off flies.

But if you pull their wings off you can no longer call them "flies". You then have to call them "walks".

I can provide four reasons why the JSB should be replaced. Can anyone here give me four (or even three) reasons it should be saved.

Aastra, if part of the reason to replace the bridge is to help people drive to and from downtown easier and quicker, then thank god. It's about bloody time this city started doing things like that since virtually everything i've seen them (and other municipalities) do is anti-automobile.

[aastra]

I can provide four reasons why the JSB should be replaced. Can anyone here give me four (or even three) reasons it should be saved.

So far it's about a thousand reasons for saving against no reasons for replacing so anything you can offer would be very interesting indeed.

[VicHockeyFan]

Saving it can save as much as $63M

There is nothing wrong with the street approaches, I'm sure it is not even in the top-10 bad areas for accidents. At 30kmh for a stretch of it, it likely has few injuries even if their is an accidnet. Making the new bridge and its approaches and then ramping the speed up to 50kmh can barely save 20-seconds off that portion of the route. I generally hear no complaints about traffic over the bridge. Douglas and the Colwood crawl get all the attention.

The bridge looks nice.

Last time they fixed it, they said the fix would last many years. Why the new fix/replacement now?

How come it took over 14 years to decide to replace the arena, with two referendums, and this thing costs twice as much, is just a road, and has to be rushed thru with no referendum or sense of reason or planning?

[aastra]

Reasons To Save It:
Because it's:
- historic
- rare
- iconic
- visually interesting
- adequate for existing and future traffic needs
- beautiful
- blue

Reasons To Replace It:
Because it's:
- historic
- rare
- iconic
- visually interesting
- inadequate for existing and future traffic needs
- ugly
- blue

[victorian fan]

New bridge viewed as 'gateway' -- it might even have a tower

This is not just a movable bridge connecting two sides of the harbour. It is viewed as a gateway into the downtown area, a beautiful vantage point to take in the Inner Harbour and the Upper Harbour, and a gateway to look at Old Town

http://www.timescolonist.com/bridge+...762/story.html

[Ms. B. Havin]

^ From that article:

Mayor Dean Fortin, who accompanied the project's citizen advisory committee on a tour of the bridge yesterday, envisions a crossing that offers more opportunity to soak up the city's natural and man-made beauty.

"As we stand out here," he said, "you really get a sense of how many people ride their bikes, walk across here, and stop to look at our amazing harbour.

"So we want to make sure that there's an opportunity for view lines, that the bridge is more than just getting from one side to the other, that it's an experience in and of itself." Fortin even floated the idea of incorporating a tower into the $63-million bridge replacement project.

Oh goody. Maybe a tower like London's Tower Bridge, to complete the fantasy?

How about adding a urinal to the top, for after bar closing hours? But don't forget the baby diaper changing station and accessibility issues. Add an elevator while you're at it.

<sigh>

So, let me get this straight: we already have a landmark (the existing bridge) that's worth looking at. But we're going to tear it down and build a viewing platform or tower so we can gaze at ...what? The nearly non-existent Victoria skyline?

Jeez-louise, it's the bridge that's the interesting bit, not the alleged "vistas."

[martini]

^
A case of 'can't see the forest for the trees'?

[Ms. B. Havin]

"...we want to make sure that there's an opportunity for view lines, that the bridge is more than just getting from one side to the other, that it's an experience in and of itself..."

It already is "an experience in and of itself," Mr. Mayor.

It's the bridge you experience when you cross it. You don't experience "view lines," you view them. Seems to me that those are two different things, and what the JSB does so well is create an experience of crossing.

So why remove that experience in the interests of opening up "view lines" (to what, she asks herself?, shouldn't I pay attention to crossing the bridge?), then struggle mightily with design to replace the experience?

Would it not make more sense to leave the existing experience and enhance it (through refurbishment)?

[martini]

Originally Posted by G-Man

I have heard of bonuses for exceeding timelines and objectives but usually you don't get a bonus for doing what you said you would do. That would be inane.

Maybe not.
From today's TC article:
If the money comes through, senior governments will cover two-thirds of the project's cost. But in order to meet grant rules, the project has to be substantially completed by March 31, 2011, leaving little time to waste.
http://www.timescolonist.com/bridge+...762/story.html
Otherwise we're stuck with paying for the whole shot?

[martini]

Originally Posted by Ms. B. Havin

Would it not make more sense to leave the existing experience and enhance it (through refurbishment)?

Of course.

[spanky123]

Originally Posted by martini

Maybe not.
From today's TC article:
If the money comes through, senior governments will cover two-thirds of the project's cost. But in order to meet grant rules, the project has to be substantially completed by March 31, 2011, leaving little time to waste.
http://www.timescolonist.com/bridge+...762/story.html
Otherwise we're stuck with paying for the whole shot?

In the real world there are penalties for not completing projects on time instead of paying extra to have the work done as agreed.

I am sure that there will be no shortage of people jockeying to make a buck off of this project. Should be lots of opportunity to negotiate hard with vendors to make sure that the taxpayer is protected.

[Jill]

Does anybody but me find it curious that, even though this is a TC article inviting reader comments, no comments are posted? I tried contributing my "save the bridge" two-cents' worth this morning, but nothing has been posted. Anybody else?

[VicHockeyFan]

Originally Posted by Jill

Does anybody but me find it curious that, even though this is a TC article inviting reader comments, no comments are posted? I tried contributing my "save the bridge" two-cents' worth this morning, but nothing has been posted. Anybody else?

I suppose they get screened, and no one is working there most of the time outside of the three hours before deadline, esp. on a long weekend.

[Ms. B. Havin]

^ Still no comments up on the TC site.

Long weekend or not, that's a very poor show, imo.

People get turned off. I don't comment on any TC articles anymore, not least because of the time-lag and not knowing if my comment will show up.

Nor do I write letters to the editor anymore, largely for the same reasons.

The mainstream media have an opportunity to engage public discourse, but instead their insistence on gatekeeping and on slowing the conversation down ends up contributing to the death of democratic participation/ conversation. Normal people shut up more and more, and the silent majority grows.

[amor de cosmos]

what an awful idea. tower bridge was built in london in 1894 & we're on the west coast of canada, and it's 2009! it would be better if a new bridge were inspired by first nations architecture in some way, like arthur erickson's museum of anthropology @ ubc:

How about our version of the Tower Bridge?

Instead of replacing the Blue Bridge with a similar structure, why not replace it with a replica of London's Tower Bridge? The towers could be used for housing, medical and social services for the homeless and include showers, bathrooms, lockers, a subsidized cafeteria and an art gallery.

The external surface of one of the towers could include a jumbotron screen similar to the one at the arena that could provide commercial advertising and civic announcements. The design of the bridge would mirror thelLegislative building and would continue Victoria's affection for British history.

R.A. Carr
Victoria

http://www.timescolonist.com/Monday+...791/story.html