ยป Victoria’s New Bridge
The City of Victoria has floated three designs for the new Johnson Street Bridge. They’re all bascule bridges, meaning they swing up with a counterweight, because that’s the simplest energy-efficient way to build a movable bridge.
- Reverse bascule
-
The copy says this is inspired by van Gogh’s Drawbridge with Carriage, except that bridge is a double regular bascule, not a single reverse bascule. The inspiration is that, unlike 20th century bascules like the current Strauss bridge, the counterweight is a panel instead of a cement block. It’s hard to make out in the distance sketches, but the way it works is the horizontal panel hinges to vertical when the bridge opens. I can’t find a picture of an open reverse bascule, so I think they must be uncommon. - Rolling bascule
-
As far as I can tell, the Canary Wharf area has a bunch of bridges and proposed bridges: one of them is a rolling bascule.* According to the city of Victoria’s director of engineering, the Canary Wharf bridge has the rolling mechanism below the deck with a walkway passing through it: the Victoria version has the rolling mechanism above deck to be more visually striking.
I believe the Te Wero Bridge being built in Auckland is a rolling bascule bridge; I wish Victoria’s bridge could be so cool:
- Cable-stayed bascule
-
You get to choose your tower shape and angle, as well as how the cables are connected but these bridges all basically look the same:
Writers to the Times Colonist have suggested a replica of the current bridge or of London’s Tower Bridge.
I voted for the rolling bascule because I think it has the best combination of industrial girders to reference the working harbor and stupid modernist curves to reference tourism.
* The City’s website stole the photo from WikiMedia, violating copyright.
No plan for a fixed bridge, eh?
Jack
14 Sep 09 at 12:09 pm
Victoria’s harbor is expected to remain a working harbor for the foreseeable future.
Jared
14 Sep 09 at 12:22 pm
Yeah, but the current bridge is only a few feet too low. Raising the bed would allow it to remain fixed.
Ah well, no one ever said logic dominated in these concerns: I vote for the pretty one!
Jack
14 Sep 09 at 12:59 pm
Apparently the current bridge is ridiculously over-engineered. I like the idea of a mini “Tower” bridge.
Jack
14 Sep 09 at 1:01 pm
@ Jack
Kelowna moved to a fixed bridge. It made it higher and longer and doesn’t look as nice as a lift bridge.
Karen
14 Sep 09 at 3:10 pm
They should move the train station to the other side of the bridge or just into Esquimalt. A good spot may be in the area they currently park it at night. Raise the bridge and make the road straight. Fixed bridges cost less money to build and cost less to maintain.
The city could use the small amount of extra money to buy the expensive vacant properties down there. That with the train station area would allow them to expand on the little park that is down there now. Perhaps this would revitalize the area.
Fred
14 Sep 09 at 7:10 pm
Damn you and your rational assessments, Fred. We’ve already settled on an impractical swingey bridge like The London one that’s always falling down in nursery rhymes. No good comes from changing horses mid-stream!
But yeah: Good idea. Actually, the owner of those buildings is taking them to her grave. “I would rather they rot than be put to good use” type stuff; “with my last breath I curse thee, officious forces of city development!”
This goes on more than you might imagine in Victoria. The guy that owns the vacant lot beside the View Towers has let it, too, rot out of spite. “Why should I invest in Victoria when they let ridiculous things like the View Towers destroy both skyline and property values?”
I wholeheartedly approve. The real estate is theirs, let them do as they wish. Eventually they’ll die and their children, eager for the fiscal rewards of obeisance to the authoritarian group, will steamroll their dysfunctional civic legacy.
Jack
14 Sep 09 at 7:59 pm
The Chamber of Commerce asked council specifically about both a fixed bridge and ending the rail line in Esquimalt. I never saw a response.
This letter to the editor claims that a fixed bridge would have to be unreasonably high and having to find a way into downtown from the end of mass transit would suck.
Jared
15 Sep 09 at 9:01 am
Yeah, actually. One of the big reasons the island train system isn’t useful for anything is that its terminal should be somewhere more central, like the old Crystal Gardens. But no one ever said these things were rational.
In theory the train would be ideal for down-island commutes into the capital. I think it’s quite fast, or has the potential to be. But in practice people don’t like ending their journey with a 15-20 minute walk, or bus wait.
Jack
15 Sep 09 at 10:41 am
The SkyTrain has been criticized as replacing 2-minute walks to slow buses with 15-minute walks to fast trains. People seem to prefer it, though: probably because it feels faster?
I’m hoping that once they put a rail lane on the new bridge the sunk cost fallacy will lead them to extend it deeper into downtown.
Jared
15 Sep 09 at 2:13 pm
pollockdan
The City of Victoria has selected option B, the “Rolling Bascule” design to replace the #bluebridge. #yyj
23 minutes ago from Twitterrific
Karen
24 Sep 09 at 7:34 pm
[...] get public participation in the development stage instead of just asking the public their opinion between fully-formed alternatives. But it’s quite daunting to jump into one of these topics that you haven’t already [...]
MentalPolyphonics » Victoria’s Strategic Planning
14 Apr 10 at 4:02 pm
[...] why they weren’t divided the other way (perhaps growing out of the awkward approaches?). The plan for a replacement bridge maintained three car lanes – I like to think that the middle lane would be reversible, [...]
MentalPolyphonics
8 Jun 10 at 12:51 pm