none were anything special. nor were any especially offensive. i'm perfectly happy with what was chosen as long as noone expects anything special.
i just can't figure out why offer the pretense of the three+ month public input period if they were going to disregard it. how could anybody expect that this would NOT be pointed out in the headlines?
Is it me, or does the downtown bridge look confused? It looks like a steel bridge that was renovated in need of additional supsension support. blah.
steven, i think you've mentioned you're from down there. why the lack of ambition? i would think civic pride would inspire something bigger, better. was there a strict budget constraint?
chicago had a decent multiple bridge competition a while back, actually we won for two pedestrian bridges, nothing too special, but certainly a lot different results than what were shown in that article.
not so much a lack of ambition. there was a lot of talk about how these bridges would read as symbols of the city, especially since we're kind of a city of bridges. (we have a few already.) but i'm not sure that louisville always knows how to translate ambition into realization.
...and then there is always that maddening conversation about whether ANY design project "fits"...which means whatever the person who says it wants it to mean at the moment.
Highlights: Cables in median, allowing unobstructed view of river
That won't actually be possible anyway once they put the guardrails up. When's the last time you drove on a bridge of any kind of design where you could actually see off the sides? Unless you're in a huge truck, you can't see above the protective guardrail. Seems a flimsy reason to justify an elegant design.
As for the bridges themselves--the East End is elegant but a conservative rip off of bridges done elsewhere, and the downtown one is downright ugly. I agree with whoever said it looked like a crappy retrofit of a sagging train bridge or something. Man.
It's really depressing that they simply chose the cheapest. Construction estimates are so wildly variant anyway...
And the guy who opposes the bridges in the first place thinks they should be talking about how to *pay* for a bridge, not how to design it! Ironic considering that same line of thinking appears to be saddling Louisville with two poorly designed bridges.
And yeah, Steven, maddening post-justificative speeches going on in that article.
If they're so concerned about cost, which is perfectly valid, then they should just ditch the "iconic" bridge concept and just make two very pretty, non-designy cheap bridges. (See Pittsburgh's many industrial bridges.) If they want iconic design, then go for it, and commit the money. Don't try to do some half-assed cheapo version of beauty.
Dec 13, 06 1:59 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
the way to get public buy-in?
the designs for louisville's two new bridges over the ohio have been selected.
Neither of the designs was the public's choice, according to more than 5,000 ballots cast since November through Internet voting and open houses.
I actually like the East End Bridge. The Downtown Bridge is nothing special. I don't think I could pick that out of a crowd.
none were anything special. nor were any especially offensive. i'm perfectly happy with what was chosen as long as noone expects anything special.
i just can't figure out why offer the pretense of the three+ month public input period if they were going to disregard it. how could anybody expect that this would NOT be pointed out in the headlines?
the bane of public process is often banality. it takes rare talent to seduce the public with a project that rises above the safe and cheap design.
Is it me, or does the downtown bridge look confused? It looks like a steel bridge that was renovated in need of additional supsension support. blah.
steven, i think you've mentioned you're from down there. why the lack of ambition? i would think civic pride would inspire something bigger, better. was there a strict budget constraint?
chicago had a decent multiple bridge competition a while back, actually we won for two pedestrian bridges, nothing too special, but certainly a lot different results than what were shown in that article.
chicago pedestrian comp designs...
not so much a lack of ambition. there was a lot of talk about how these bridges would read as symbols of the city, especially since we're kind of a city of bridges. (we have a few already.) but i'm not sure that louisville always knows how to translate ambition into realization.
...and then there is always that maddening conversation about whether ANY design project "fits"...which means whatever the person who says it wants it to mean at the moment.
BLOW JOBS FOR POLITICIANS
not to be an ass, but:
Highlights: Cables in median, allowing unobstructed view of river
That won't actually be possible anyway once they put the guardrails up. When's the last time you drove on a bridge of any kind of design where you could actually see off the sides? Unless you're in a huge truck, you can't see above the protective guardrail. Seems a flimsy reason to justify an elegant design.
As for the bridges themselves--the East End is elegant but a conservative rip off of bridges done elsewhere, and the downtown one is downright ugly. I agree with whoever said it looked like a crappy retrofit of a sagging train bridge or something. Man.
It's really depressing that they simply chose the cheapest. Construction estimates are so wildly variant anyway...
And the guy who opposes the bridges in the first place thinks they should be talking about how to *pay* for a bridge, not how to design it! Ironic considering that same line of thinking appears to be saddling Louisville with two poorly designed bridges.
And yeah, Steven, maddening post-justificative speeches going on in that article.
If they're so concerned about cost, which is perfectly valid, then they should just ditch the "iconic" bridge concept and just make two very pretty, non-designy cheap bridges. (See Pittsburgh's many industrial bridges.) If they want iconic design, then go for it, and commit the money. Don't try to do some half-assed cheapo version of beauty.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.