h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hey did you see this thing about replacing the Walterdale Bridge?

http://www.edmonton.ca/transportation/roads_traffic/walterdale-bridge.aspx

I didn't find out about the public meeting until the morning after it happened.

I looked through the information (pdfs) the city has on that page and I have to say, I feel very uncomfortable with the direction it's going, not least because of the infantile insecurity expressed by the desire to have a 'signature' bridge. And the design examples they show are absolutely ridiculous for the context -- all sticky up into the airy and flashy and getting in the way of the view of the valley and the city. If I had my way I'd build something with a very low profile, with simple elegance and perhaps a touch of neoclassicism. The river is fairly narrow there; there's no need for a great huge cable stay bridge or anything like that. Just a simple span like many of the Seine bridges in Paris. Now *that* would be a signature bridge. And the 1% for the arts would be covered with sculptural accents, decorative balustrades and lampposts, etc. No big shoes, no in your face 'modern' architecture.


I guess I'll have to fill out the comment form.

And proof-read it before I send it in.

No I hadn't seen it, it's certainly news to me! I'm going to take a look at the link now.

...and I meanReally, 'signature' bridge? What, the next Golden Gate bridge in the river valley? *hums I left my heart in San Francisco ...or was that 'on Sask. Drive'??

Yes, 'signature' is the new 'world-class'.

I have a friend, a university professor originally from Montreal, and one comment he has made to me about Edmonton is that he is amazed that politicians here still use the term 'world-class' without meaning it ironically.

It's embarrassing.


I've been making notes -- notes which have rapidly become writing. I'll be sending in a 'comments' form much augmented in the 'further comments' section. It may well be a small volume.


I keep seeing the cable-stay pedestrian bridge over the Deerfoot in Calgary grown very large and plunked down in Walterdale, on the timeless site of the ancient ford of the North Saskatchewan and I think 'They're going to really blow this.'


You know the bridge at the south end of Banff Avenue (in Banff)? That's a 'signature', 'world-class' bridge! And it is because it was built by people who said to themselves 'let's build a practical but attractive bridge across this river which in no way interferes with the geographic and historic context and might even compliment those contexts a little bit.'

That sort of practical, complimentary unobtrusiveness is exactly what they should be looking for to link Walterdale and Rossdale, not the bloody Sydney Opera House.


And most of the bridges they use as examples are ones across vast bodies of water rather than a rather narrow, shallow inland waterway.


And I've hardly even considered the southern approaches (which will, if I remember correctly, very much impact your immediate neighbourhood).



Nor have I considered the rather specious argument that the Walterdale Bridge is at the end of its life-span. One span of the Low Level is older -- the first bridge across the River in Edmonton. If age is an issue, why aren't they talking about replacing the Low Level Bridge? If they knew how to market things, the Low and High Level Bridges would be our bloody signature bridges and they could just concentrate on putting something practical in Walterdale.






I'm seriously going to write an elaborate submission. Even though I've got three commissioned paintings to finish before Christmas.

And I agree with you, in that area all that's needed-in my opinion-is something simple & functional with an understated elegance.

Right, the bridge at the south end of Banff Avenue is the perfect example!

Thanks for the reality check.

I'm simulposting here: thanks for the reality check about the bridge in Banff.

I'm going to go ahead with writing something up, although, as always, I'll expect that nothing will come of it.

I dread what will be there in a few years.


Do you know Paul Kane's painting of Edmonton? I have a small reproduction of it hanging in my upstairs hall just below a small reproduction of Glyde's painting of Edmonton from the Second World War years http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCESearchMedia&Params=A1&MediaId=5068 (perhaps my most favourite painting ever) and just down a way from a large 'Plan of Edmonton Settlement, N.W.T.' http://www.acmla.org/maps/123.jpg


Here's a bit of a washed out image of Kane's painting from wikithingy: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Kane_Fort_Edmonton.jpg

That is the spot the new bridge will go.

I think it's time for the city to make up for the history they destroyed downtown in the '70s. We need to put some history back.


I should do some sleeping, too. Market in the morning.

I probably don't need to mention, but, I don't think it would be inappropriate for you to print out one of the comment forms, and maybe a few for your friends, so that a more representative sample of Edmonton's populace, whatever their thoughts, might be considered by the powers that be . . .

Ah, good itdea!

I've decided to abandon the form questionnaire in favour of just a statement. Here's what I've got so far (it'll be a pdf with Paul Kane's painting at the top):


The Walterdale Bridge Replacement and Approach

An Alternative Participant Questionaire


I am a resident of Old Strathcona (first three digits of my postal code: T6E), I have owned my home in the area for decades, I shop in the community, I drive in the community, and I use public transit regularly.

I did not attend the public meeting on this subject principally because I didn’t hear about it until the morning after. Being a single parent of a child with a disability, I likely would not have been able to attend even if I had been aware of the meeting.

I would like to comment on the two areas covered by the questionnaire in reverse order.


The Bridge Design

The river crossing between Walterdale and Rossdale is the original crossing, the crossing which has been used for thousands of years. The only crossing which can possibly be appropriate at this site is one that is timeless, not a flashy product of a momentary architectural fashion. It must be functional but also rooted in and reflective of our collective history at this spot. It should have a low elevation, a low profile, reflective of the original ford and of John Walter’s ferry. It should have a low elevation, a low profile so that the River Valley and the skyline are not blocked or overshadowed. There should be no tall superstructure (a cable-stay or extra-dosed structure would not be appropriate) – an attractive pedestrian balustrade and fitting street lighting should be enough. It should be adult and confident, not capricious.


What is left in Rossdale and Walterdale of Paul Kane’s painting of Fort Edmonton? What did cities look like when Edmonton was first a fort? Let’s put a piece of an 18th century city into the true historic heart of our city, a Paladian bridge, traditional arch or girder, updated certainly, with sculptural accents by Edmonton artists, perhaps brickwork accents made of reclaimed Edmonton brick, sculptural portraits, gargoyles of a sort, depicting John Walter and his family and his workers, and the generations of Cree and Blackfoot and Metis people who crossed before them.

I envision a bridge like many of the bridges across the Seine in Paris, like the simple but elegant bridge across the Bow River in Banff. A bridge of masonry, not glass and steel and plastic. A bridge for people to use, as the original ford was used, as a way to go to gatherings with family, friends and associates. It should be a moment of peace and security rather than a mad leap. It should emphasize public transit, pedestrian and cyclist use: it would be a tragedy to build another freeway through the most important historic spot in our city.

This is the Twenty-First Century. Any city can build a high-tech, flashy bridge. Only a mature, confident city can build a bridge wholly reflective of its history, its strength, and its future potential.

I would like to see a bridge which represents an audacious, mature stand. I would like to see a bridge which doesn’t shout out embarrassingly ‘Look at me! I’m world-class!’ I would like to see a bridge which inspires visitors to remark ‘Edmonton has taste. Edmonton is confident. Edmonton doesn’t need those embarrassing “City of Champions” signs. Edmonton isn’t competing anymore – Edmonton has made it.’

Edmonton has made it. We should show that we are a mature city by building a fitting, tasteful, subdued monument to the oldest river crossing in our city and to the people who have used it for thousands of years.


The Approaches


I am less concerned about the approaches. Rossdale has already been made into a web of ugly freeway. The Walterdale side is a challenge to imagine. Is it appropriate to channel Gateway Boulevard away from Scona Road and the Low Level Bridge? The Low Level Bridge’s three exits take people to Churchill Square and City Hall, to the Convention Centre and Little Italy, and to Rossdale, River Valley Road, and the Legislature. Do we want to compromise End of Steel Park for another freeway into the River Valley? Should we not be looking at reducing traffic on our roads rather than increasing it?

I find little to recommend about any of the proposals for the south side approach.




Conclusion


Again, my main concern is with the bridge design. I would be ashamed if a capricious, tasteless and meaningless piece of pop architecture were dropped into the historic heart of our city, distracting from the attractiveness of our river valley and ignoring the deep history of the place. If we are to build a ‘Signature’ structure, let’s tell the world that Edmonton’s signature means good taste and respect for history rather than the fashion of the moment.