Calgary is building a $20 million bridge for walkers and bikers. It spans the Bow River, was designed by Spanish starchitect Santiago Calatrava, and somwhat resembles a cigarette cookie.
The tubular structure (both literally and in ’80s surf-speak), is a stylistic departure for Calatrava who’s best known for soaring, sail-like structures. The Peace Bridge, by contrast, doesn’t reach or command–it feels more humble, like a caterpillar stretching to span a small rift. Part of that humility is it’s small structural footprint, projecting more than 300 feet across the Bow River without any in-water supports. The red is certainly a bold addition to Calatrava’s usual whitewashed look. We question whether we, um, like that particular choice… but points for boldness.
On the functional end, city officials expect the bridge will see around 5,000 crossings a day in its first year. They’re planning it particularly with commuters in mind. At this point, 10 percent of Calgarians (?) already get to work on foot or bicycle and that figure is expected to grow. The Peace Bridge offers quick and easy access to the downtown business district. Over the next 25 years, city planners expect the downtown population to double, from 30,000 to 60,000.
The project, which is scheduled for completion next year, isn’t exactly cheap — construction alone will cost $15 million (Calatrava’s fee is another $2 million). The city seems happy though: They are budgeting a similar amount for another bike/ped bridge at a different point along the Bow. The design contest for this new structure was announced just this week.
More images of the Peace Bridge after the jump:
.
.
.
August 21st, 2009 at 5:24 pm
That is a very costly pedestrian bridge. $20 million!! Really?
August 21st, 2009 at 5:30 pm
I know! That’s a *lot.* (It’s C$25 million.)
But, again, worth noting that they’re ready straight away to invest in another one. Here is a link to the city’s official page about the Peace Bridge — it’s quite informative, actually, and makes a strong case for the project.
August 21st, 2009 at 5:33 pm
The Zakim Bunker Hill Bridge was not designed by Calatrava - it was designed by Miguel Rosales and HNTB.
But - as far as I’m aware, this is the first project by Calatrava that uses color so prominently.
August 21st, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Tsarchitect,
Ahem, yes, I’ve hurriedly erased all evidence of that assertion. The one in Seville, then, let’s say.
JR
August 21st, 2009 at 7:22 pm
The city might be happy but taxpayers aren’t - at the cost, the design, and the location of the bridge.
The design is reasonably unpopular because while its daring, it doesn’t fit with Calgary’s existing architecture at all. In addition, because its right next to an existing heliport, height restrictions prevented the architect from incorporating his usual soaring designs.
The location is controversial because its within sight of two existing pedestrian bridges - many people see the bridge as unnecessary.
As to cost, Banff just announced a 75 metre pedestrian bridge over the Bow River that will cost $C2m. About 40% shorter, but about 1/12 the cost.
August 21st, 2009 at 7:48 pm
If we made every structure “fit in” with all the existing ones there would be no progress, no creativity…
Why not stand out?
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:07 am
You’re right Kevin. Calgary is a city of mostly sandstone, concrete and glass and this bridge would be very different from anything else we have (which is mostly utilitarian). I’m not defending the position taken by the opponents, just reporting it.
I’m virtually certain that if this were a $2m bridge instead of $25m, there’d be no opposition to the design, its just one more thing for opponents to latch onto.
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:32 am
Hmmm. Cigar? Maybe, but I first thought Chinese Handcuffs myself.
August 22nd, 2009 at 9:33 am
In response to Uarbchitect it is important to set the record straight on who designed the Zakim Bridge. The concept was developed by Christian Menn the world famous Swiss engineer (and incidentally a professor of Calatrava’s at ETH in Zurich). The engineer of record was HNTB. Miguel Rosales was a young designer (not at that time an architect) working for Wallace Floyd Associates whose assigned task was to assist Christian Menn throughout the development of the design. Christian Menn paid frequent visits to Boston during design and construction to ensure that his design concept was faithfully adhered to. Many people and firms contributed to the design and construction of this bridge. Of one thing we can be certain, we would not have such a proud monument in Boston were it not for the creative genius of Dr. Menn. Contrary to widespread belief (promoted largely by Mr. Rosales himself), Miguel Rosales was a willing and able assistant but could in no way be described as the designer of the bridge.
I write as a former Chief Architect of the Central Artery Project, a principal of Wallace Floyd Associates and erstwhile employer of Mr. Rosales.
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Dallas - quite right. Cigar is inelegant analogy but has virtue of being a short word
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Anyone in Calgary who sees he bridge as unnecessary probably isn’t a user of that portion of the pathway system, especially during rush hour. The two bridges close by are relatively narrow and offer no separation for cyclists and pedestrians. This bride solves that problem by placing pedestrians on a separate grade from cyclists.
Mike’s positions certainly isn’t that of all Calgarians, just of a couple “journalists” and generally angry people who for some reason are availaible in the middle of a workday to call into Talk radio and whine.
If this were a $150 million interchange no one would be complaining.
August 22nd, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Very nice addition to Calgary. The city has an excellent outdoor pathway system.
August 22nd, 2009 at 6:03 pm
hmmmmm - go Calgary! I like it a lot!
August 23rd, 2009 at 10:55 am
Good grief, its not MY position, I’m just reporting what I hear around town.
August 23rd, 2009 at 11:57 am
I wish I could get a scam going like Calatrava and the other modernist architects have got going. You charge several times what a thing SHOULD cost; not even including the inevitable cost overruns. You design it in such a way that it’s going to look as dated as a 70’s era modernist concrete monstrosity within a decade or two, and if possible you make it less functional into the bargain.
Genius!
The sort of rich idiots and city boosters that push for these projects and celebrity architects don’t seem to have any sense of perspective or proportion at all. Surely, an engineering firm with a less famous name could have built something nicer looking, and left the city with $20 million to spend on expanding their pathway system in other parts of the city.
Don’t mind me, I’m still bitter about what happened when Milwaukee hired him to design an addition to the art museum. Ironically, an addition to a 70’s concrete nightmare of the type I just mentioned. Afterwards, the ticket prices tripled, the museum put its collection into hock to cover the overruns, and for all that they got a teeny tiny gallery space that let in damaging UV through its windows. One of the few pleasures of living in Milwaukee was that museum, and Calatrava’s overindulgence priced it out of my reach.
August 23rd, 2009 at 12:32 pm
at 2 million dollars, with the restrictions the bridge has in both height and no piers in the river, you wouldn’t be able to span the 120 m unsupported.
the Banff ‘bridge’ is basically a concrete beam over the water with guardrails.
Calgary needs to move forward - the foster building is hardly a building that “fits in” architecturally…the much lauded Centre Street Bridge has lions on it for goodness sake…LIONS! Calgary in the the prairies…
Jeff is absolutely right - its the whiners and reverse NIMBY’ers that are complaining. The whole notion of “fiscal responsibility” falls on its face when the 1.5 billion dollar ring road gets no negative press and might save someone 15 min of driven. Yeah, that’s worth my tax dollars…
August 23rd, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Calatrava is behind the eight-ball on this one. This bridge has already been done… in Seattle.
Check it out.
http://www.museumofflight.org/memorial-bridge
August 23rd, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Well, Omaha’s ped bridge cost 20$ million (same as this bridge, and similar length), and sees crossings that only number a few hundred a day. So compared to that, this bridge is a great value with 5,000 crossings a day!
August 25th, 2009 at 12:36 am
My take on the appearance of the bridge was not a cigar, but a “finger trap” (which may be similar to “Chinese handcuffs”). There’s a device used in electric and telecomm construction for connecting a pull rope to a heavy cable that uses a similar design woven with stranded steel wires.
As far as architects being well paid for designing weird looking buildings, the Disney Concert Hall in Los Angeles may be considered a “poster child” for this discussion. One might think that many years ago, Frank Gehry (who designed it) lost his T-square and never replaced it. Or it could be that as a child he was frightened by a straight line or a right angle.
August 26th, 2009 at 1:39 am
I am a big fan of Calatrava’s bridges, I’ve visited 17 of them around the world. This one is certainly a departure from his style - - but so are many others.
In a way it reminds me of a high-speed rail bridge at Osera de Ebro in Spain.
Check it out:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bridgink/2120570587/
August 26th, 2009 at 11:00 am
I’m happy to see this bridge going forward. Yes, $25 Million is a fair chunk of change, but it pales in comparison to all the boring bland interchanges and overpasses that have been built in this city.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:27 am
One of the points Calatrava made was that for a good portion of the year, Calgary is covered in snow, and especially with a low profile bridge like this, if it were white, it would get lost. So while I have mixed feelings on the red overall, it’s really going to look spectacular in the wintertime when the rest of the river area is white.
September 1st, 2009 at 11:20 am
As was pointed out, the problem most Calgarians have with the bridge (and yes, most Calgarians do have a problem with it) is the cost. It just seems bizarre that the C-Train airport spur won’t be built until after 2020 or that many roads (like Elbow Drive) went without resurfacing for years past when they became rutted and potholed, yet there is money sloshing around to build pedestrian bridges orders of magnitude more expensive than anything seen as necessary in Calgary today.
As for the bridge itself, it has grown on me. If I lived in the north I could see myself enjoying it very much as a cyclist. Just not as much as not having to take a taxi to the airport or not having to worry about breaking my car driving downtown.
September 28th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Another Calgarian here,
I must say the fury over the new Bow bridges stemmed initially from the cost (How much? To do WHAT?!?) and then flowed into the process the city uses for building these kinds of projects. The city appeared to decide on the need for and design of the bridges (and then the naming: not going there) completely out of the blue with little to no rationale or public input. It was just announced one day: We spent $25 million to design two bridges and build one. Howd’ya like them apples?
All this while the world economy was starting to tank.
Now, Albertans, and especially Calgarians, are notoriously cheap. Not frugal, not penny-pinchers, just cheap. Face-spiting, nose-removing cheap. Lowest-tax-rates-in-Canada-and-still-complaining-cheap. If it were up to the hard-core Calgary right whinge there’d be two-by-fours and cinder blocks across the Bow. And We’d Like It.
I like the bridge. I like what it does and what it represents. I like that it will have little impact on the already stressed river. Now that I’ve seen it, I really don’t mind the cost.
I still mind how the city does business.
October 18th, 2009 at 1:23 am
I am a TAXPAYER and I am happy and excited to have this bridge built in Calgary!