[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Claeren

Again, an article full of opinions but short on facts.

I don't want to get into an argument with you Claeren, I respect what your saying. However I think there are plenty of facts that are represented in this article that are concerning.

Their $113-million Calatrava is much bigger and is for vehicles. It is way over budget and behind schedule. They can't build the ends of the bridge because they can't get the thumbs-up from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers over problems with the bridge and the city's levee system.

For a year or two or three, their Calatrava creation will be the bridge to nowhere.

Angela also mentions Dallas built a bridge about the size of the Peace Bridge about four years ago.
"It's a simple, wonderful little bridge," she says. Cost: $2.3 million.

Then, right after speaking with Angela, we find out Ald. Brian Pincott doesn't think much of putting off building the Peace Bridge until it is debated in the next civic election. The construction doesn't have to begin now, but Pincott snickers at the idea as "hilarious."

Enough of that. Let us bring in Calgary's Lindsay Blackett, the province's culture minister and widely recognized as a man of exquisite taste. Come on, he's the culture minister.
What does he think of the bridge only 8% of the population want?
"It's underwhelming," says Lindsay.
"I expected to be wowed. I didn't get it, but maybe I don't have the proper pedigree."
He says everywhere he goes Calgarians are talking. What do they ask each other?
"Do we need to spend hard-earned tax dollars there?" says Lindsay.

Originally Posted by Claeren

How much does this Dallas city councillor think she could build a bridge for where:
- Piers into the river are to be avoided if at all possible, both for the environmental impact and for safety.
- No towers (for suspension) are to be used, due to the heliport located near the south entrance to the bridge.
- The opposing river banks are at differing heights and cannot be drastically altered.

I am guessing she would be close to $20M WITHOUT any star architect. With the same risk for cost-creep as any staritect design.

Is that an opinion or fact?

And I have to question, if the factors such as the helipad, the differing heights and the other factors are based around the location of this bridge. Then does this bridge have to go there?

Originally Posted by Claeren

And as a bonus, a bridge designed by Calatrava will have spill over benefits to all sorts of facets of the cities 'economy' that a concrete span would not.

I'm yet to see any proof of these benefits, I don't buy that people are going to come to Calgary because of this bridge. I might buy that someone thats a tourist thats come to Calgary for other reasons might want to see it, but if we're talking about tourism benefits, then wouldn't upgrades to the zoo, or more museums, or a amusment park or wild life park be a better way to increase tourism?

Originally Posted by Claeren

As for local designers v. international designers, it is called free trade people. It is supremely ironic that it is mostly right-wing types that are so anti-Calatrava. Maybe the European Union should not award any contracts to Canadian experts in their fields and get their students to do all the work for slave wages instead!? Seems like a really good way to grow a world economy....

But it wasn't free trade Claeren, because this was never an open competition, in fact it could be called the furtherist thing from competition. to me thats against everything that responsible government should be doing. Free trade is great if the foreign firm wins the deal or contract. But award a contract sight unseen to me is wrong.

Originally Posted by Claeren

(I am not going to go over again how this spending for the bridge was NOT the work of city council, was money specifically allocated for this use, etc. Any person who actually wants to be informed knows this, and the rest... still oppose the bridge for the same tired reasons.)

The money was infrastructure money, it wasn't ear marked by the province for this bridge and we saw that in the quote from Blackett. The spending of the money was a decision by the city council. The money could have been spent on other projects that this city probably needs to focus on first.

Originally Posted by Claeren

And Moon, it is not like you EVER approve of anything. If it costs money or changes things without directly benefiting you, you don't like it. Sorry if the rest of us have a bit broader view of how the world interacts and evolves over time. As Calatrava himself said:
“to build things with beauty is a matter of dignity and not a matter of time.”

Thats actually a pretty arrogant statement by Calatrava who is treating this bridge as a peace of art thats required in his mind. But its a statement by a guy that has no clue about the infrastructure needs and requirements of a city of over a million people. If he wants his art to be out there, and he wanted to see this beautiful thing built he should have donated the design for free. But based on the problem with the Dallas bridge, he didn't take the city environment or construction issues into account.







Claeren.[/quote]