[Old Johnson Street Bridge] Design and technical discussion

[Holden West]

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

What better location for counseling the destitute than a bridge. Also, a fine place for locating distracting flashing video screens. They should have one in the Deas Island Tunnel as well. I nominate citizen Carr for a C-FAX Citation Rose.

[aastra]

I don't think one jumbotron screen would be enough.

[aastra]

It really bothers me that we're inventing shortcomings so that a new bridge can address them. Has anybody ever complained about how the Johnson Street Bridge blocks views? Nope. Such a complaint makes no sense. You might as well complain that the Empress Hotel blocks views. But the powers that be will make darned sure that the new bridge opens up views because everybody knows that views need to be opened. This is an argument against everything that makes the old city of Victoria what it is.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: officialdom needs to give up on trying to please people who don't like downtown Victoria. Anybody who says they don't go downtown because the existing bridge blocks views is not going to be going downtown anyway. Meanwhile, most of the people who love downtown now also love the existing bridge. Are we not worried about alienating the positive folks? Nope, you could replace the bridge and boot out the Coho and gut the old town to build ten more Centennial Squares and the downtown boosters would still keep coming. But maybe, just maybe, if you replace the bridge and boot out the Coho and build ten more Centennial Squares you'll also snatch a couple of people from the suburban big boxes.

[aastra]

Comment at the bottom of the T-C article:

...totally agree with the concept of creating an iconic crossing that will, like the Golden Gate Bridge, Tower Bridge, Brooklyn Bridge and other great bridges, become a symbol of our great city. Personally ('though there is certainly a bit of historical value attached to it) I think the old "blue bridge" has had its day and has no redeeming architectural value, in fact it's a bit of an eyesore...

Blurb from www.historicbridges.org about the rationale for replacing Chicago's North Avenue Bridge:

One of the oldest bascule bridges in the town, and with ornate portal designs and builder plaques, city officials chose to demolish this historic bridge, wiping out a critical part of what makes Chicago the beautiful and prosperous city it is today.

In its place, city officials are all excited because they are building a "suspension bridge" that they say looks like the Golden Gate Bridge...

The way the engineers talk about how this new bridge, in their minds, looks like the Golden Gate Bridge, it is like they are jealous of San Francisco. Chicago should not be jealous. They should instead seek to continue to maintain the movable bridges in the city, which define Chicago's historic identity just like San Francisco's bridge.

[aastra]

The problem with Victoria is that it looks too much like Victoria and not enough like other places.

[VicHockeyFan]

Originally Posted by aastra

It really bothers me that we're inventing shortcomings so that a new bridge can address them. Has anybody ever complained about how the Johnson Street Bridge blocks views? Nope. Such a complaint makes no sense. You might as well complain that the Empress Hotel blocks views. But the powers that be will make darned sure that the new bridge opens up views because everybody knows that views need to be opened. This is an argument against everything that makes the old city of Victoria what it is.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: officialdom needs to give up on trying to please people who don't like downtown Victoria. Anybody who says they don't go downtown because the existing bridge blocks views is not going to be going downtown anyway. Meanwhile, most of the people who love downtown now also love the existing bridge. Are we not worried about alienating the positive folks? Nope, you could replace the bridge and boot out the Coho and gut the old town to build ten more Centennial Squares and the downtown boosters would still keep coming. But maybe, just maybe, if you replace the bridge and boot out the Coho and build ten more Centennial Squares you'll also snatch a couple of people from the suburban big boxes.

That's just provided me with a great idea. Why don't we get those prostitutes that are heading to the harbour (from Paul's Motor Inn) to distract the Coho captain when he is backing out to leave, thus causing him to throw it back into FORWARD too late, so the Coho knocks down the Blue Bridge, then the US ferry company has to pay for the replacement bridge?

[Holden West]

Originally Posted by VicHockeyFan

That's just provided me with a great idea. Why don't we get those prostitutes that are heading to the harbour (from Paul's Motor Inn) to distract the Coho captain when he is backing out to leave, thus causing him to throw it back into FORWARD too late, so the Coho knocks down the Blue Bridge, then the US ferry company has to pay for the replacement bridge?

That's even more brilliant than your electromagnetic solar collector invention.

[Caramia]

I am 99% positive that letter was tongue in cheek

[aastra]

As long as the cafeteria served dry foods and beverages in drink boxes I think it would work. Soups and sauces and such would be out of the question.

[LJ]

Originally Posted by amor de cosmos

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:


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

Nooooooooo, no more indian stuff. we are overloaded with it now.

[G-Man]

^ I can only guess you are refering to the taj mahal restaurant on Herald well you are in luck they are tearing it down.

[aastra]

Maybe a westcoast modern superstructure would work on the new bridge? Illuminated in blue at night?

[aastra]

I saw somebody else calling for a "London Tower Bridge" design. Where did I see that? I think it was in the letters to Monday Magazine.

[Chris J]

Originally Posted by amor de cosmos

doesn't this look simpler than what's already there!!!

I can imagine this is the option that Clara Kramer and her family are hoping for. It would account for her sitting on the Northern Junk building for so long. The last property I recall her selling was in the path of the Spencer Interchange, so perhaps there is a pattern here...

[Dylan Leblanc]

that alignment doesn't look very convenient for Pandora Ave.

[Caramia]

Well today was a real eye opener. The focus of the meeting (which started at 7:30am by the way... I am not a morning person. Nuff said) was on taking us through the various bridge styles and approach options and ruling out the ones that didn't work. What we did not do was discuss the information that led to the city's decision to replace instead of repair. I am coming to this very late in the game, and the elected representatives have already made that decision. I have no new information on that. I'm sorry.

The following notes are based on my scribbles during the presentation. There was a powerpoint but they did not include it in the binder. We were told we would get it later. I might be wrong about details, and if so, I apologize in advance and hope that someone at the City will do some fact checking for me.

The presentation of bridge options was done by the engineer at MMM and an architect from a London firm: Wilkinson Eyre Architects. I am still uncertain about what exactly the role of these architects are. Have they been hired to be THE architects? Have they been hired only to show us what is possible, with a competition at the end once the winning style of bridge is chosen? Will they even be able to bid if there is a final competition? These are questions I will ask Mike Lai and when he gets back to me, I will let you guys know. Definitely, the bridges we were looking at today did not look like the absymal freeways that MMM's online portfolio showcases. These were much more architecturally interesting, although they had not yet been shaped, and were, in fact, just basic sketches. Eventually we should receive the powerpoint presentation that shows the bridges we were looking at. When we get that, I will be happy to share.

*****************

A few thoughts and new information, some of this might need to be copied to the appropriate thread.

- The CAC certainly has some very intelligent and knowledgeable people on it. Joe Van Bellingham was a very important critical voice all the way through. David Cubberley and Allison Ashcroft also stood out as very keen thinkers, and some of their comments were just excellent.

- We had not known how long the CAC would be involved in the process. It seems we will be meeting periodically all the way through. This provides some oversight during construction - and in particular I think David Cubberley and Alison Ashcroft will be important voices as the trails and bike paths and approaches begin to manifest. It seemed to me that the CAC might be a good launch pad for some fundraising to put in extras like bike storage or green walls on the approaches in order to shift the burden from taxpayers.

- What I did not see was a lot of the economics. We were asked to choose between bridges that we were told were "roughly equivalent" in cost, or "all within the budget." CAC members were constantly asking about cost savings or cost benefit, and it seemed as if the costing was a key decision making tool we needed but did not have. In the end the architects and engineers were asked to make educated guesses. For instance, a twin lift bridge would be more expensive to operate, if not install than a single lift bridge... etc.

- Another thing that was missing was evidence of consultation with the kayaking community and the air traffic in the harbour. Some of the bridges could end up creating a nice refuge for kayakers to separate them from commercial marine traffic. Others might push them toward the marine traffic. The cable stayed example has a mast that could extend as far as 40 m up in the air, then add the cables and you can see how air traffic might be a problem. (Big Blue goes up 20 m high) If we choose 3 design types for the public to look at, and then 1 is a non-starter due to conflict with other sea or sky traffic, then we've done a disservice.

- The harbour walkway path will pass under the bridge on the east side (downtown). The Goose can connect under the bridge on the west side. A pedestrian lane can be at a lower grade arching up to grade in the middle beside the train. It can then join the walkways so that pedestrians can easily pass under the bridge crossing over there, rather than dashing across three lanes of traffic and a railway on the Downtown side.

- The railway will extend over the bridge in order to protect future LRT or trolley linkages. This must have been decided at a previous meeting.

- Big Blue will stay open while the new bridge is being constructed. They will take down the rail bridge in order to give themselves more room during the duration of construction. The new bridge will be slightly North of the Blue Bridge. This means that looking up towards the upper harbour the view will of the new bridge's western abutment will be hidden. Therefore, any signficant architectural features should be focused on the Downtown side.

- There is the possibility of recycling steel from the demolished rail bridge to incorporate in the new bridge design as a reference.

[Caramia]

*********************************

Here is a summary of the discussion. (I'll post details later, and maybe even a couple of sketches).

-> Some type of Bascule bridge is the one option that really works for this spot. A swing bridge takes about 20 minutes to open and close, compared to the bascule which takes only a few minutes. Various lift bridges and tilting bridges create a limited height, where right now there is an unlimited height for boats going through. A retracting bridge takes up a lot of space on both sides which could back traffic up and also you have maintenance issues with grit getting in the tracks.

--> I championed a strong vertical element on the Downtown side at least. Others seemed (with one exception) to agree. The Blue Bridge is a beautiful icon on our skyline, and to replace it with something flat or unobtrusive would be a crime.

--> The Bridge should have transparency and lightness about it. Structural shape is important. (My one concern about this is that it might guide the architects towards the masts as the only real vertical element, as compared to the beautiful latticework of the Blue Bridge which is transparent, and light, but still substantial.)

--> Viewing opportunities on both ends, and also while on the bridge. Places to stop and watch it go up, or to pause and look over the water.

--> Multi-sensory. Big Blue sings as you cross it. We can't have the open grade because it is not environmentally a good plan to have car detritus going into the water, but when choosing materials for surface think of sound of crossing. We are not looking for a freeway surface.

--> Asymetrical. If it is a twin bridge, with both sides lifting up then the weakest place for the seam is in the middle. If you have a short span on the west side, and a longer span on the west side it will be stronger, but also give the option to raise only one side, depending on the size of boat coming through. This could save operating cost and energy. If freight rail was to go across it we would want a single bridge, not a twin. Then the seam could rest on a solid bank and be very stable.

--> The bridge is a gateway. For this reason the CAC preferred the double mast designs to the single mast designs (which split the bridge in two). They wanted a gateway/portal that visually allows the compressed space of Old Town to open up to the vista to the west.

---> The space under the new bridge will also be a gateway. While this might be framed beautifully if a wheel bascule is chosen (more on that later) whatever is there should be a pleasant space to pass under, and a portal from the precious tourist area to the working harbour.

---> The bridge should not block the harbour trails or future development when it is open. (There are some problems with the cable stayed bascule there.)

---> We have to consider the queuing space left for cars in the approaches to help manage congestion along the approach.

---> The Theatre, or Event of the bridge opening is critical. When people see Big Blue open, they say "WOW". People stop and watch.

--> The final three designs that seemed most viable were:

1) An Asymetrical or single Wheel Bascule Bridge

The closest example is on Canary Wharf, London
The advantages this bridge has are:
* The bigger the wheel, the smaller the motor (and energy needed to operate) - it could easily go up higher, to produce a vertical element on top of the bridge up to 20 m high ( the height of Big Blue). (i'll have to wait for the power point slides in order to show you what I mean by this, there's nothing like it I can find online)
* It would be unique, certainly on the west coast of North America, if not world wide.
* The pedestrian pathways can go through the actual moving mechanism of the bridge, even when it is actively opening. That would create an exciting experience passing under the bridge and draw people up the harbour pathway.
Disadvantages
* Unless they use something like the lacing from Old Blue, or some other strategy to create transparency, the wheels look blockier than the other options. Personally I like that. But I got the sense in the room that lightness was a big part of what they wanted.
* Potential to use a west coast contemporary architectural style, while the others all look very cold - more of that stark simplicity of European modernism.
* Aside from the wheel, not a lot of other vertical features could be included in a way that makes sense functionally. In other words, the wheel would be the focus, anything else added on top would be gingerbread.

2) Single Cable Stayed Bascule.

An example can be found here and here
Advantages
* Very light and elegant
* Has more verticality
* Might be able to separate kayak traffic from commercial by making them come around between the pylon and shore.
* possibly more queuing space for cars when bridge is lifting.
* if driving through cables extend the sense of gateway.

Disadvantages
* The mast is part of the ballast, the higher it is, the smaller the motor needs to be - they could extend up as far as 40 feet - potential problem for air traffic.
* Nothing unique or special about it. These are a dime a dozen in the pacific northwest. This is a bridge, not an icon.

3) Double Reverse Bascule

I don't have any images that resemble even slightly what they showed us. I REALLY wish they had that power-point printed out to hand out to us. Technically, this is supposed to be the closest to what Big Blue is now. But the sketch they showed us with two masts and an overhead counterweight looked nothing like it. Frankly, this option made me feel like sobbing on my binder. Especially as committee members seemed to like it. It could be in their wisdom they could see what it would be like in a pleasing architectural style (again my plug for a west coast contemporary adaptation) What I was looking at was basically two masts and a blob like shape that sort of floated up above them. I don't have any advantages or disadvantages for you there. I guess if the public chooses this one, the architect could shape it into something nice. Strauss did.

I am going to count on Mat Wright to reshape this post into a johnsonstreetbridge.org blog post. But I will be learning more tomorrow, and hopefully be able to answer questions at the public meeting tomorrow evening. For details on that see johnsonstreetbridge.org.

[VicHockeyFan]

We can't have the open grade because it is not environmentally a good plan to have car detritus going into the water

Huh? The storm drains from every street in Victoria go into the ocean.

[Caramia]

Yeah, that's supposed to be something we are changing.

[Caramia]

I drew you a picture.

[AnonAnnie2]

Nice picture!

[Caramia]

At the South side, facing the Tourist Harbour the pedestrians begin at a lower grade and walk up the gently sloping bridge then back down again to where they can cross under the bridge. They can look at the pretty Inner Harbour while walking and once in awhile a train will come by above them, and that will keep some of the excitement that people love about the Blue Bridge.

At the North side, facing the Working Harbour, there is a (possibly two-way) mixed use pathway, which can accommodate recreational and kid's bikes (the commuter bikes can use the bike paths, skateboards, roller blades, walking, jogging, stroller moms walking three in a row... whatever. This is likely a less tranquil but more vibrant and youthful type of mixed use path, and it suits that it faces the bustle of the Working Harbour.

[gumgum]

1) An Asymetrical or single Wheel Bascule Bridge
The closest example is on Cannery Wharf, London

So their getting inspiration from one of the most vapid and sterile neighbourhoods in London - let alone all of Europe?

I have seen this bridge in person and it is underwhelming. In fact, it just looks like a regular old flat, non-raising bridge. You see the wheel shaped steel portion? Well it just dissappears when the thing is down.
There is nothing of significance in this design at all.

The second option, you're right Caramia. It's nothing new. We've seen it all before.

I would like to see examples of the 3rd option.

Thanks for the lowdown, Caramia.

[http]

Originally Posted by Caramia

[ snip ]
- We had not known how long the CAC would be involved in the process. It seems we will be meeting periodically all the way through. This provides some oversight during construction - and in particular I think David Cubberley and Alison Ashcroft will be important voices as the trails and bike paths and approaches begin to manifest.
[ snip ]

Not John Luton? The re-alignment of the foot and bike trails at the end of Harbour Rd. during its repaving and extension comes across as singularly gross incompetence. It's like the people responsible have lived their entire lives with drive-in churches, banks, and gymnasiums. No flow, and a complete abandonment of "share the trail". I'd hate the gateway to crossing the water to suffer a similar fate; the current bridge approaches for foot and cycle have only minor flaws.

7:30 am? Gah. You deserve a medal. And a bigger cup of coffee.

[Caramia]

Gumgum the canary wharf version is only an example of the type of mechanism. What it looked like in their preliminary sketch was very different. The bigger the wheel, the less powerful the motor has to be. A very big wheel with a much smaller motor could be as high as the Blue Bridge. 20m. I think that could be very cool if done right.

When you were at Canary Wharf, did you ever walk under the bridge through the mechanism? Was it anti-climatic?

I don't have as much on the third option. That was presented last along with a sort of complex but beautiful scissor option. There wasn't as much discussion around those two. It is possible that there was some burn out by that time. Imagine a suspended stream of giant seagull crap floating on two lamp-posts. Looking at the scrawny poles and awkward ugly weight in the drawing, it was hard to imagine it was the closest to the Blue Bridge mechanically. But I shouldn't judge by the drawing. I've been trying to imagine it incorporating some of the super strong post-wood materials, as well as the shapes and textures of that west-coast style - less airy and more grounded. That helps.