HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2010, 4:08 PM
exploration camper's Avatar
exploration camper exploration camper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 31
I also completely agree with Kgc. a replica is not the original and for the incremental cost difference on the life span of a new bridge a signature structure should have been the best replacement option.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2010, 4:45 PM
Jerry's Avatar
Jerry Jerry is offline
^^*^^
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: YXE
Posts: 794
A replica in my mind is not an option.

I'm all for restoration or something really unique, after all we are the City of Bridges.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2010, 4:51 PM
kgc087's Avatar
kgc087 kgc087 is offline
Urban Dreamer
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 1,128
I told ward 1 city councilor this and I recommend you and express your opinion to your city councilors.
__________________
Just be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2010, 8:44 PM
Ricopedra Ricopedra is offline
Free as can be?
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 417
The replica IS a signature bridge, and in time, in fact, in less time than it takes a Timbit wait in the morning rush, all will be satisfied and even forgotten. Build the black bridge with wider lanes so girls can drive on it, too. Give it paths on the sides so we can enjoy the views. Everyone's happy. The prices they submit, always about half of the actual cost, for some reason, are similar for whatever project they've decided upon. So just do it! Stop padding pockets! That old black bridge looks great there, and a replica doesn't f#$n change that fact. Saskatoon isn't Paris in the 1700's. If you waffle, they're going to build a street across the river. Jump at this chance for some black-beamed height!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2010, 9:48 PM
drm310's Avatar
drm310 drm310 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 629
Actually the replica would not be painted black like the current bridge. The specs say it would be made of "weathering" (or Corten) steel, where the top layer naturally rusts when exposed to the weather. In doing so, it forms a stable protective coating that stops further corrosion. Therefore the colour would be a brown-orange.

I believe the tree grates downtown and at River Landing are weathering steel, so that should give you a good idea of what the colour would be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricopedra View Post
The replica IS a signature bridge, and in time, in fact, in less time than it takes a Timbit wait in the morning rush, all will be satisfied and even forgotten. Build the black bridge with wider lanes so girls can drive on it, too. Give it paths on the sides so we can enjoy the views. Everyone's happy. The prices they submit, always about half of the actual cost, for some reason, are similar for whatever project they've decided upon. So just do it! Stop padding pockets! That old black bridge looks great there, and a replica doesn't f#$n change that fact. Saskatoon isn't Paris in the 1700's. If you waffle, they're going to build a street across the river. Jump at this chance for some black-beamed height!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2010, 9:52 PM
Stormer's Avatar
Stormer Stormer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,585
I do not understand why Saskatoon would want a replica of a 19th century industrial railway style steel bridge. Saskatoon has a couple of nice bridges but this is definitely not one of them. I think it is just pure nostalgia. I did live in Saskatoon for a few years, but is was not enough to fall in love with this thing. I know you don't want a freeway style bridge, but almost anything else would be better than the traffic bridge in such a key location.

Saskatoon deserves something better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2010, 9:55 PM
Stormer's Avatar
Stormer Stormer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,585
Quote:
Originally Posted by drm310 View Post
Actually the replica would not be painted black like the current bridge. The specs say it would be made of "weathering" (or Corten) steel, where the top layer naturally rusts when exposed to the weather. In doing so, it forms a stable protective coating that stops further corrosion. Therefore the colour would be a brown-orange.

I believe the tree grates downtown and at River Landing are weathering steel, so that should give you a good idea of what the colour would be.
An orange bridge? Hmmm.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2010, 10:07 PM
Devon Devon is offline
Regina SK
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Saskatoon via Regina
Posts: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by drm310 View Post
Actually the replica would not be painted black like the current bridge. The specs say it would be made of "weathering" (or Corten) steel, where the top layer naturally rusts when exposed to the weather. In doing so, it forms a stable protective coating that stops further corrosion. Therefore the colour would be a brown-orange.

I believe the tree grates downtown and at River Landing are weathering steel, so that should give you a good idea of what the colour would be.

This material is huge right now. It's being used for a lot of buildings and other things around the world, including some sculptures for the Regina city square project. I love the way it looks but am very curious to see what it would look like for the whole bridge. In the fall as the leaves turn, it would definitely be beautiful!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2010, 10:33 PM
Devon Devon is offline
Regina SK
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Saskatoon via Regina
Posts: 643
A cor-ten steel pedestrian bridge.


courtesy of panaramio.com

I have come to the conclusion that I think I will like it a lot if done right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 3:15 AM
kgc087's Avatar
kgc087 kgc087 is offline
Urban Dreamer
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 1,128
It's not only about the beauty of the bridge it's also about what it symbolizes and a lot of people are forgetting that. This is not a main connector, that's why Senator Sid Buckwold was built. To water this spot down to the point of utilitarian is an insult to architecture. To make a faux replica is an insult to the heritage and to our future as a city. Basically attaining heritage status or building a signature bridge is the route to go. A bridge based on the principles of the current one is not signature and never will be.
__________________
Just be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 5:25 AM
Kruzat Kruzat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 49
Are you guys kidding me? I thought this board was smarter than this. I'm shocked that your all ignorant enough to think that building a replica is the worst idea.

The original bridge was not designed for traffic, it was designed for fucking horses. It was poorly engineered, and honestly, it was/is garbage. Because it's old, it doesn't mean a THING. When you restore an old vehicle, you basically build the whole thing over again, but with better seats, a better motor etc. That's what they are going to do. They're making a bridge that will look almost identical except it will be wider. It's still going to be a beautiful, iconic bridge. So shut up about your history bullshit.

It makes no sense to try to refurbish it. why?

- Steel rusts. It's been rusting for along time, there isn't anything they can do. It's shit and will forever be shit. The bridge deck is now taking a large portion of the loading because of that and that's why it's no longer safe. The original stucture isn't doing it's job, because it was poorly engineering. It's a bad design!!
- The supports won't last very long, also a bad design
- It's too narrow. Emergency vehicles, and woman, cannot drive on it.
- It costs the same as tearing it down and making it over again. BUT WIDER

Let go of it guys, the city isn't going to be worse off because of this. In 10 years people will say "this is the nicest bridge, back in my day it used to be so damn small you couldn't even drive across it without shitting yourself, now they widened it. Oh, and it's never down for REPAIR"

And back to being realistic, if you want a signature bridge, I welcome you to go down to city hall and beg them to shell out another 30 million bucks just to makes something 'pretty'. Don't get me wrong, I think architecture is a big part of a city, but there's a limit on sexiness and functionality. The new bridge will STILL be iconic and show our heritage (which, honestly, means nothing)

I'm sorry if I'm being blunt and offensive, but it makes no sense trying to keep this pile of shit alive. That moron at city hall was saying "ooo, but if we make it wider, it's not the original design" SHUT UP about the original design! It was a cheap, poorly engineered, structurally pathetic, and useless, why would you want to keep going on that route? Why are we so afraid of improvement?

It's not heritage, it's garbage. Please, for the love of god, DO NOT send letters to your councilor begging them to refurbish.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 5:34 AM
Nathan's Avatar
Nathan Nathan is offline
Hmm....
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormer View Post
I do not understand why Saskatoon would want a replica of a 19th century industrial railway style steel bridge. Saskatoon has a couple of nice bridges but this is definitely not one of them. I think it is just pure nostalgia. I did live in Saskatoon for a few years, but is was not enough to fall in love with this thing. I know you don't want a freeway style bridge, but almost anything else would be better than the traffic bridge in such a key location.

Saskatoon deserves something better.
I was born and raised in Saskatoon for the most part... and I will admit that this bridge was always my favourite...

As the poster above mentioned, I know it wasn't the best designed bridge... and we were definitely taught it was originally built for horse drawn traffic... but it didn't stop it from becoming my favourite. I used to beg my mom to drive across that bridge when we had to go across the river for something.

However, at this point, I feel it's best to start over... Use a design with a similar appearance, but may as well make it functional for the present day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 5:35 AM
dsim249's Avatar
dsim249 dsim249 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 958
^ Post of the week award! << Your award.

I 100% agree.

EDIT: That was to Kruzat. Nathan sneaked in there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 5:37 AM
swilley's Avatar
swilley swilley is offline
Saskatchewan's Largest
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 1,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kruzat View Post
The original bridge was not designed for traffic, it was designed for fucking horses....
HAHA. Well said, all of it.... I completely agree.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 5:37 AM
Ruckus's Avatar
Ruckus Ruckus is offline
working stiff
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Woodlawn Cemetery
Posts: 2,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by kgc087 View Post
It's not only about the beauty of the bridge it's also about what it symbolizes and a lot of people are forgetting that. This is not a main connector, that's why Senator Sid Buckwold was built. To water this spot down to the point of utilitarian is an insult to architecture. To make a faux replica is an insult to the heritage and to our future as a city. Basically attaining heritage status or building a signature bridge is the route to go. A bridge based on the principles of the current one is not signature and never will be.
My thoughts as well. Authenticity can not be created through imitation. Part of what makes a city interesting and worth experiencing/remembering is its history. In this sense, the Traffic Bridge should be viewed as an asset, not a liability. That's the problem with City Hall. The ones calling the shots are steeped in accounting and engineering principles. The word heritage is not in their professional vocabulary.

I find our Mayor's position on this issue quite telling.

EDIT: City Hall's narrow approach to city building is an embarrassment.

Last edited by Ruckus; Nov 24, 2010 at 5:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 5:55 AM
gowest gowest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 368
Bridge

I can't believe people want to keep a rusted out bridge. Rust is like a cancer, what you see is not what is really there, it spreads and eats away until there is nothing left. Rust can be cleaned and treated but it never goes away. Maybe I would agree to redo it if we were sure it would last another hundred years, but it will not. It was not designed for today's needs. People should take a close look under this bridge and see what it's condition really is. I'm not an engineer, but I can see when something is getting to the point of no return. Let's move on and get building a replacement.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 8:09 AM
jrochest jrochest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kruzat View Post
- It's too narrow. Emergency vehicles, and woman, cannot drive on it.
Which woman, in particular, cannot drive on it?

Seriously, if you're going to be a sexist a-hole, try to learn to spell.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 1:01 PM
Ricopedra Ricopedra is offline
Free as can be?
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 417
Lots of good talk on the bridge here, probably better than the line-towers at city hall ever debated the issue. I may have started that girls can't drive on it bit - sorry about that, but that was kind of based on experience with girlfriends past, two who would avoid the bridge whenever possible. There were only two. I digress.

Anyways, I loved driving over it - even in an old '72 Impala! But the best way was in the summer on my motorcycle. The shade-stripes created by the beams combined with the warm breeze and of course the heart of Saskatoon - the riverbank and downtown, could make anyone want to live here. For a few months at least.

Some of you were talking about a covered bridge and whatnot, but it's painfully obvious there's a scream here for something a little different. And it's a beautiful little site. Little is the operative word. It's not a relatively massive undertaking like other crossings. Just do it well. Maybe even get a corporation like potash to have naming rights if that's what it takes to get a few million bucks more. Lamp posts are cool, too. Yea!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 2:01 PM
gowest gowest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 368
Bridge

Wow, don't even suggest naming rights, the heritage people will go nuts. I've lived here all my life and it's been the Traffic Bridge, the Steel Bridge, The 19th Street Bridge, the Victoria Bridge and so on. Any ideas what a replic bridge would be called? (only names that can be printed here)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2010, 2:33 PM
Cicero Cicero is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by gowest View Post
Wow, don't even suggest naming rights, the heritage people will go nuts. I've lived here all my life and it's been the Traffic Bridge, the Steel Bridge, The 19th Street Bridge, the Victoria Bridge and so on. Any ideas what a replic bridge would be called? (only names that can be printed here)
If Charlie Clark gets his way and stops the bridge from being replaced, I suggest the Traffic Bridge be renamed "Clark's Crossing."

In all seriousness, there should be more than three options on the table. I don't want the current bridge rehabilitated for reasons I've already mentioned, but neither replacement option is very inspiring. I dislike the modern steel truss bridge's appearance, lack of 1.5m bike lanes/shoulders, and its cost. I dislike a modern concrete bridge's appearance, but like its cost and 1.5m bike lanes/shoulders. I wish there were a couple more options as I would not mind the city spending a bit more money on a bridge that looks good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:05 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.