Toronto CityPlace Puente de Luz Bridge | ?m | ?s | Concord Adex | Francisco Gazitua

As am I...preliminary rendering below.

MD-97-overpass.jpg
 
Note the stone construction with metal railings. It's delineating a new movement towards traditional materials in modern bridge construction. It's a dramatic moment indeed, being on the edge of a new movement.
 
Thanks for posting the report, DSC. It's good see something happening. The design of the bridge was not been finalized so what is shown in the report schedules are there to identify location and minimum height.
 
That's good, because the bridge in that document has all the charm of the pedestrian bridge crossing the QEW at Dixie.
 
^this pathetic little project, much-debated by the little minds of all the project stakeholders (bonus points to city planners)... is quite simply an embarrassment.

This was a perfect opportunity to (figuratively) give the finger to that monstrous barrier, the rail corridor, with a welcome bit of public domain design . This ugly little truss bridge (no doubt validated because it is a Bathurst bridge "mini-me") is probably the only so-called improvement to waterfront access between Spadina and Bathurst that we will see in our lifetimes, and I cannot believe we have to settle for this.

There are hundreds of great pedestrian bridge designs around the world and given a support pier is also in play, all kinds of innovative concepts could be looked at which would be "buildable" without interfering with corridor traffic.

Yes we have 2 yummy pedestrian bridges at present, one being Calatrava's Humber Bay Park design that is "invisible" unless discovered, the other being the Humber River bridge which really makes the most of its marquee (high visability) location...a genuine looker.

The Cityplace/rail corridor bridge location is obviously in a highly-visible, marquee location and chooses to make nothing of the opportunity... I for one will curse it when I see it.

Given the need to have long access ramps west of the pier (to accomodate the required height over the corridor) something like Richard Rogers' bridge design for Glasgow would fit the bill nicely... and give us a welcome bit of "wow" that the railway lands sorely need.

If there was a need to partially enclose the bridge to discourage Bay Street brokers from jumping on the GO trains (suicides or free commutes), it would still look terrific.

Sure I'd love a Calatrava "Sundial" here, but would happily settle for a stripped down, no-frills cable-stayed structure (a few examples below).

"the detailed design of the bridge is both functional and aesthetically pleasing".

I guarantee this ugly little truss bridge is what they will build because it's cheap and can be fabricated off-site and popped into place with minimum effort (our local mantra).... it will look pretty much like the crappy little sketch in the report (a render promise kept!).

What a waste. Let the graffiti gangs have their way with it.

Example of Glasgow-style bridge (Portland to Draper with approximate pier location):

rogers-glasgow.jpg
 
Maybe it's the little bit of optimisim in me that thinks the design of the bridge will be a bit better than "this ugly little truss bridge" depicted in the staff report, which isn't even the actual design. Maybe I'm hopeful because of lines like this in the report: "Concord Adex will be hiring an artist to ensure that the bridge design incorporates a strong public art component." It's like when there is a massing concept to visualize the location and height of a building or buildings within a block plan, and people get all up in arms that the design is terrible and typical conservative Toronto or what not.

Chances are probably pretty good that we will not get a Glasgow-style bridge (which I would love, awesome job with that, 3D!), any of the other bridges posted above, or Gehry BP Bridge winding into CityPlace Park, but I think it will be at least slightly better than a mini Bathurst Street truss bridge.
 
While some optimists have noted that the design has not been finalized, what we don't know is how finalized it really is. In Vaughan's letter to his constituents last month also described a box-truss design - that combined with these new renders is pretty disheartening.

(Brilliant post 3D, by the way)
 
How do we go about making our views heard to the city on the complete inadequacy, lack of vision and missed opportunity this is?
 
Careful, some people on this board do not like you looking at international "look at me" designs taken from non-local architects who do adhere to the strict (and imaginary) Toronto 'culture' and 'style.' ;)
 
marcus a j:

I wouldn't count on the public art component - it can begat some cheap attempt at art - and that component is not likely to affect the structural design of the bridge itself.

I think this proposal needs some activism.

AoD
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top