[Old Johnson Street Bridge] General discussion
#21
Posted 02 April 2009 - 05:32 PM
#22
Posted 02 April 2009 - 06:22 PM
The problem is not a few cars falling into the water during an earthquake, it's losing the bridge!
Well, so we lose the bridge and have to build a new one which is whats being discussed anyway... All I'm suggesting is that seismic retrofitting seems to be a red herring.
I like the bridge too, and would be very sad if it was replaced by something like the Bay St. bridge. However, I do wonder if the existing structure is all that special (as opposed to the overall design). I compare it to the Ship Canal bridges in Seattle, and they have all the neo-gothic watchtowers made of stone, etc. The Johnson St Bridge just has a utilitarian metal shack. Maybe something with the same esthetic and basic design, but even better, could be built.
#23
Posted 02 April 2009 - 07:52 PM
http://www.atv.ca/vi...news_67886.aspxFuture Of Johnson Street Bridge To Be Decided
VICTORIA - The Future of Victoria's landmark Johnson Street bridge has become an urgent priority for city council.
Mayor Dean Fortin says deciding whether to rehabilitate or replace the 85-year-old structure is Victoria's number one infrastructure priority.
One plan may include deconstructing the existing rail portion of the structure and building a new road bridge in its place.
The existing road portion would then be decommissioned to make way for the new rail section.
Project Manager Mike Lai says regardless of the final decision, we can expect some traffic delays and road closures.
Replacing the bridge could cost up to 40 million dollars while the city says rehabilitating the existing structure may cost as much as 30 million dollars.
Victoria Mayor Dean Fortin says the city wants needs to act with a sense of urgency in order to be eligible for funding from the provincial and federal governments, as much as 25 million dollars.
Council is still looking at how best to engage the public on the issue. A final decision is expected April 23rd.
#24
Posted 02 April 2009 - 08:03 PM
How much was the Spencer overpass?
#25
Posted 02 April 2009 - 08:17 PM
#26
Posted 02 April 2009 - 08:20 PM
keep the bridge for rail , pedestrians and cycles. Then put in a tunnel for vehicles.
Pedestrians, cycles and cars can go up and down a pretty good grade, rail cannot. So if you keep a rail bridge, it has to be low grade or a bridge of the type we have now.
#27
Posted 02 April 2009 - 08:37 PM
#28
Posted 03 April 2009 - 07:28 AM
#29
Posted 03 April 2009 - 07:54 AM
"Do we spend $25-to-$30 million to rehabilitate a bridge that in 40 years we’re going to have to replace and spend another $50 million, or do you spend $35-to-$40 million to have a bridge that lasts 100 years? It’s a difficult place to be,”
Kind of like saying do I spend $10k refurbishing my 72 Dart when I may have to do it again in 10 years, or do I spend $18k and buy a new Neon that *may* last 20 years (but probably won't).
#30
Posted 03 April 2009 - 09:16 AM
Opened in 1924, it is one of only a handful of bascule bridges left in Canada. It has become part of the city’s culture, and appears in such names as the Blue Bridge Repertory Theatre company, Spinnaker’s Brewpub’s Blue Bridge Double IPA beer and the book Beyond the Blue Bridge
Yeah, but why would officialdom care about any of that stuff?
How much did Kelowna's new bridge cost?
The folks in charge just seem to want to keep chipping away at everything that's unique and/or special about Victoria. But they get in a stew because somebody wants to build a condo building on a parking lot. It makes no sense.
#31
Posted 03 April 2009 - 09:18 AM
#32
Posted 03 April 2009 - 09:36 AM
Aastra - Exactly my point. We hear the city complain about 4 metres of height on a building over a parking lot but a local landmark that has made it into our culture and storytelling is "just an old beater". It is kind of demented.
#33
Posted 03 April 2009 - 11:06 AM
I suspect that the answer is that the old bridge we consider esthetic would be considered clunky by a structural engineer and that the new techniques are more expensive.
#34
Posted 03 April 2009 - 11:40 AM
“The bridge is not about to fall down,” Madoff said. “What we’re trying to plan for is that one-in-how-many-hundreds-of-years event that may hit Victoria and if it hits Victoria, it may affect the bridge.”
I hope Madoff's view of all municipal infrastructure is not as short sighted as this. Surely she can see the advantage of creating a new bridge BEFORE the existing falls down. All this infrastructure $$ won't be around for ever.
As for the designs, if Victoria wants a landmark bridge, how about this?
Picture the proposal with the slanted "1" spar, except replace the 1 with the city logo V~, with the cable leading down from the ~(waves).
(Kudos to the first one who can photshop that together)
#35
Posted 03 April 2009 - 01:15 PM
Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900), The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1891
#36
Posted 03 April 2009 - 01:16 PM
#37
Posted 03 April 2009 - 01:23 PM
#38
Posted 03 April 2009 - 01:43 PM
#39
Posted 03 April 2009 - 01:44 PM
Spencer Rd bridge (and just the bridge) was $4.2 million for construction + soft costs
Really? Why were all the newspapers quoting 30 million?
#40
Posted 03 April 2009 - 03:29 PM
^ Its a one-way trip to Esquimalt!
you mean from Esquimalt? What if Yates, Johnson & Pandora were 2-way again?
Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users