Ongoing Calgarians complaining about pedestrian bridges thread

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

I haven't weighed in much on this bridge but after reading through alot of this thread a few things rub me the wrong way. I find it interesting that people think getting Calitrava was some sort of progressive risk. The man designs bridges all over the world. You know exactly what you are getting into.


I total disagree with the comments about not having anyone local with the chops to pull something unique off. Just go to any school of architecture web page and see the wonderfully creative work that is being produced. That is before they enter the cut throught, mean, dirty business that is architecture.

There are literally hundreds of quality young architects in this province, the transition to "star" architect has alot more to do with positioning an politics than raw talent. I have seen some of the most talented people out there religated to drawing tile layouts for bathroom interiors, or picking cap flashing colors for the local big box.

Trust me, there is a ton of talent in this City, it is more the developers that have no vision or ambition. Any one that knows anything about the business of architecture understands this.

The St. Patrick's bridge competition proved that the local talent couldn't design a bridge of the same quality. Don't get me wrong, some nice bridges were imagined, but no young architect could have pulled of the peace bridge.

[RogerWilco]

To enter a design competition takes a lot of money and a lot of time. That competition didn't give you even the slightest taste of the local talent. A lot you you people seem to think this stuff is like doing a water colour painting on the weekend in your basement. Alot of the talent in this City don't own their own firms and don't have the resources to enter competitions. Alot of them are working for slave wages just trying to feed their families.

Many young talents, if they were given hundreds of thousands of dollars in a direct contract could take the time needed to produce results. Now that would have been a real forward thinking risk. Calitrava was not a risk in the least.

You people understand that unless you win you don't make any money entering competitions correct? That means only people with Personal wealth can direct the resources to allow for the amount of time needed to create great design. Or you could spend the time if you are given a direct contact.

[worth]

What do you mean "you people"?

[Bigtime]

So you would have rather had the city take a HUGE gamble by giving a 25 million dollar bridge to a completely unknown local architect?

I think the city would have really lost it at that.

[You Need a Thneed]

Its actually pretty comical to think that someone sitting in their basement with no experience could have designed something better than the peace bridge, when Calgary's best architects showed hat they couldn't.

Are you actually serious? Bridges actually have to be buildable, and not just "look nice".


The peace bridge just happens to look amazing, it is amongst the more complicated engineered structures anywhere for its size, meets the design criteria, etc. I think some starting out architect that you are talking about would have trouble simply meeting the design criteria in this case.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by worth

What do you mean "you people"?

Sorry, the people that think there is no talent in this city.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Its actually pretty comical to think that someone sitting in their basement with no experience could have designed something better than the peace bridge, when Calgary's best architects showed hat they couldn't.

Are you actually serious? Bridges actually have to be buildable, and not just "look nice".


The peace bridge just happens to look amazing, it is amongst the more complicated engineered structures anywhere for its size, meets the design criteria, etc. I think some starting out architect that you are talking about would have trouble simply meeting the design criteria in this case.

Read my post, I said it "is not" like doing a water colour in you basement.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

So you would have rather had the city take a HUGE gamble by giving a 25 million dollar bridge to a completely unknown local architect?

I think the city would have really lost it at that.

No, a few posts through this thread have supported the bridge saying it was progressive because going with Calitrava was risky. I am saying it was the opposite.

[moon]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

The St. Patrick's bridge competition proved that the local talent couldn't design a bridge of the same quality. Don't get me wrong, some nice bridges were imagined, but no young architect could have pulled of the peace bridge.

The designs from that competition that I saw were just as ugly as the peace bridge is. Not sure why a local guy couldn't have wasted as much money to produce something so meh as Calatrava.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Its actually pretty comical to think that someone sitting in their basement with no experience could have designed something better than the peace bridge, when Calgary's best architects showed hat they couldn't.

Are you actually serious? Bridges actually have to be buildable, and not just "look nice".


The peace bridge just happens to look amazing, it is amongst the more complicated engineered structures anywhere for its size, meets the design criteria, etc. I think some starting out architect that you are talking about would have trouble simply meeting the design criteria in this case.

I already know most of what you said in your post. That is why I am telling people that you can't compare the peace bridge design to the other competition. You can't spend the time nor resources needed in a competition unless you are personally wealthy. Why do I have to repeat myself here?

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

You can't spend the time nor resources needed in a competition unless you are personally wealthy. Why do I have to repeat myself here?

I guess what I am having trouble wrapping my head around; how would you solve that? Everybody who submits a design gets $10,000? Or $50,000?

That could get up to $25M fast without even building it.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I guess what I am having trouble wrapping my head around; how would you solve that? Everybody who submits a design gets $10,000? Or $50,000?

That could get up to $25M fast without even building it.

I don't have an answer to that. Calatrava's design fee was most likely around 10% of construction cost ( I am just guessing on that). My point was just that it takes tremendous time and resources to do proper design.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

So you would have rather had the city take a HUGE gamble by giving a 25 million dollar bridge to a completely unknown local architect?

I think the city would have really lost it at that.

By the way, how do you think many star architects became star architects? It is just like show business baby. The right place at the right time, and some talent.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

I already know most of what you said in your post. That is why I am telling people that you can't compare the peace bridge design to the other competition. You can't spend the time nor resources needed in a competition unless you are personally wealthy. Why do I have to repeat myself here?

If you don't have the resources to do enough of a preliminary design for a competition, you aren't capable of designing the bridge, period. The st. Patrick's bridge competition allowed anyone to submit, even those with no resources.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by moon

The designs from that competition that I saw were just as ugly as the peace bridge is. Not sure why a local guy couldn't have wasted as much money to produce something so meh as Calatrava.

You are entitled to you opinion of the bridge's looks. However, the peace bridge's design quality is not a matter of opinion. You can tell Calatrava knows what he is doing, the design quality is far above what I've seen from anyone else in this city.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

By the way, how do you think many star architects became star architects? It is just like show business baby. The right place at the right time, and some talent.

Calatrava is a starchitect because he can make the functional beautiful, like not too many others can. Many architects can design something that works, and then dress I up to look nice, but Calatrava doesn't do that. The dressing up is thought of from the start.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Calatrava is a starchitect because he can make the functional beautiful, like not too many others can. Many architects can design something that works, and then dress I up to look nice, but Calatrava doesn't do that. The dressing up is thought of from the start.

On the contrary if you don't spend the proper resources to ensure your proposal is feasable your entry into a design competition is little more than an exercise in self gradification.

I guess what I am trying to say here is that I know at least a hand full of people that could have spent the time to enter interesting conceptual designs but recognized it as the waste of time it would be. This also totally ignores the fact that the AAA sent formal letters of reprimand to any licenced architect that entered the competition because it was not conducted in compliance with the architects act.

There are very strict rules under the architects act controlling how competitions are to be carried out and who can enter them. So no, not just anyone could have entered the competition

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Calatrava is a starchitect because he can make the functional beautiful, like not too many others can. Many architects can design something that works, and then dress I up to look nice, but Calatrava doesn't do that. The dressing up is thought of from the start.

If you understood the business of architecture you would know that most of what you see is developer driven not architect driven. Most architects have to spend the majority of their lives working on buildings and not creating architecture. That is developer driven, and it needs to be done so that bills can be paid.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

If you understood the business of architecture you would know that most of what you see is developer driven not architect driven. Most architects have to spend the majority of their lives working on buildings and not creating architecture. That is developer driven, and it needs to be done so that bills can be paid.

I'm not sure what that has to do with my post. Of course most design is developer driven, projects don't pay for themselves.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

On the contrary if you don't spend the proper resources to ensure your proposal is feasable your entry into a design competition is little more than an exercise in self gradification.

I guess what I am trying to say here is that I know at least a hand full of people that could have spent the time to enter interesting conceptual designs but recognized it as the waste of time it would be. This also totally ignores the fact that the AAA sent formal letters of reprimand to any licenced architect that entered the competition because it was not conducted in compliance with the architects act.

There are very strict rules under the architects act controlling how competitions are to be carried out and who can enter them. So no, not just anyone could have entered the competition

I think you'll have trouble finding people who are capable of making a feasible design that don't have some kind of architecture or engineering background.

Calatrava is both an architect and a structural engineer, and the ability to do both sides of the design work is part of what makes him great.


The AAAs warning didn't stop the vast majority of the entry's to be from an architect, and every serious entry was by an architect. I don't think it would have taken that much effort to draw up a serious proposal. Sure, a couple of days work. If your idea was good, the competition would pay you to refine the design. Not having the resources is a really poor excuse, IMO.