News   Apr 03, 2020
 7.2K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 7.4K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 2.5K     0 

A new "Living Bridge" conjoined to a repurposed High Level Bridge

archited

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 21, 2015
Messages
6,761
Reaction score
16,358
Location
Ojai
There is value to be had on a Grand Scale if Edmonton looks at saving and repurposing the High Level Bridge and building a new "Living Bridge" along side it. Several Skyrise City-ites have asked how a repurposed High Level Bridge could exist if repurposed away from an auto-traffic route -- to those I would like to share a possible solution. First -- a definition for a living bridge. Most bridges throughout human history have been designed as some sort of traffic conveyance connecting two points across a river or a gorge or spanning the valley between large hills or mountains. The exceptions to this, though few, are notable. There is the Ponte Vecchio in Florence, Italy -- one of the oldest Living Bridges in the world that has little shops and residences along the span of the bridge thereby making it a mercantile street as well as a means of river crossing.
Screen Shot 2022-01-04 at 12.15.39 PM.png

With today's technology it is possible to design and build something similar across the North Saskatchewan that not only conveys vehicular traffic but that also allows for many other uses.
 
So here is a block-diagram plan-view superimposed on a Google Street Map to illustrate what I am talking about...
Screen Shot 2022-01-04 at 12.35.22 PM.png

All of the subject land is either owned by the City or the Province so that is where negotiations for development would have to begin. The City also owns the High Level Bridge (I believe). There is a heretofore unprecedented exchage that would have to take place -- the City and the Province would have cede rights to a "Development Partnership" (one that would also include the City and the Province as partners) that would also include qualified Edmonton Developers (something akin to the way development was handled at Blatchford). There would also have to be agreement on Architectural and Engineering Design -- an Architect-of-Record and an Engineer-of-Record plus premium designers that would be responsible for specific segments of the whole. To be sure this would be a project every bit as ambitious as the ICE District in total.
Some of the achievable goals would include:
* a linear landscaped park that would outdo New York City's HighLine and that would include Pedestrian Paths, Bicycle Paths and -- EXTREMELY important -- a permanent year-'round Edmonton Radial Railway route from Jasper Avenue (and beyond) to Whyte Avenue (and beyond) that employs the upper deck of the High Level Bridge.
* the lower deck of one of Edmonton's most significant historical assets would be converted from a auto thoroughfare to a Retail/Hospitality venue of the highest order. To protect the bridge a glass tunnel would be built along the upper deck and the lower deck, too, would be enclosed in glass so that elements would no longer interfere with the bridge's structural viability (of course a structural refitting would have to take place first).
* reclaiming 109th Street as a viable Main Street with shops, eateries, pubs and businesses lining both sides of the new bridge. With a nod to Jane Jacobs the second and third floors above these shops could have condo-form town houses and small-business professional offices.
* the structural piers of the new bridge would also form the foundations for mid-rise and high-rise residential towers -- some rental and some condo.
* a five star hotel on the south end of the bridge would help to define a nodal development for the area adjacent to 109th street and Saskatchewan Drive.

more to come... I have to run off to a meeting.

Back on track...
* the City and the Province would not have to pay one red cent for this project; they would simply have to cede the land to developers as their portion of the "partnership". The developers in turn then would not have any land costs to deal with (typically 5% to 7% of project costs). Each section of the project would be handled by separate individual developers picked from the most reputable Edmonton firms.
* Star-power design architects would divide the project into sections with one single developer responsible for each architectural outcome. For example, Douglas Cardinal could pick up the north-end section south to the north shore of the river; Santiago Calatrava could take on the bridge portion spanning the river; Gene Dub could deal with the towers on the south bank of the river; MODA could finesse the span over the Kinsmen Park; AC Martin could pick up the tower at the south end of the High Level Bridge; and Frank Gehry could design the nodal group at Saskatchewan Drive and 109th Street. The landscape and deck designs for the historical High Level could be accomplished by Thomas Heatherwick with MNLA and Arup Engineers. Edmonton has a horrendous reputation for handling competitions -- so there would have to be a selection process that involves direct commissioning.
* the new "living bridge" could feature magnificent landscape features such as waterfalls, vertical plantings, and accent lighting.
* the inside of the glass-form protective tunnel on the upper deck of the High Level Bridge could act as a spectacular canvas for XR FX -- light and sound shows; AR imagery; and Holographic projections -- as stated elsewhere on this site -- it could be a light show that pays homage to every major holiday throughout the year.
* the land ceded to Kinsmen could allow for disruption to their Pitch and Putt course plus provide room for additional sports facilities -- maybe an exotic skateboard park, an exercise run, additional hiking trails, etc.

My next step will be to develop a massing diagram and assigning costs but there will need to be extreme patience in waiting for these -- I have a business with a lot of demands -- this is a project of the heart.
 
Last edited:
The 'inner circulator' LRT bridge had something like a $1,200,000,000.00 estimate did it not??? Obviously less than that, but I'd bet 750mil.
IF, and that is one big IF, we ever build a replacement for the High Level (which we should do in order to preserve it and to improve traffic by getting rid os a big choke point), we should consider building it up to LRT and Commuter/HSR specs, for future proofing reasons.
I'd bet closer to the 1bn mark for this.
 
I wonder how a bridge supported by skyscrapers would be made to look attractive? Would it be possible for you to whip up a proper rendering Archited?
 
If this project was split between six for-profit developers the overall cost would not be out of reach and the end-result quality would be extremely high, subtended by a competitive nature to out-do the fellow developer. The land -- normally 5% to 7% of the cost of the project would already be ceded by the City and the Province -- no cost to the project.The Province gets exceptional quality framing in the Provincial Government precinct; the City gets a new Bridge replacing a costly-to-maintain old bridge with better and improved transportation elements. By using automated parking concealed beneath the road deck the project densifies parking by a factor of 3 and puts it entirely out of sight.
 
Would it be possible for you to whip up a proper rendering Archited?

I can't do a rendering that relates to a finished product but I can do a massing diagram rendered to answer some visual questions.

What would happen to the road linking 109 St. to Walterdale Bridge?

That road would essentially be removed making the the Queen Elizabeth Park Road the only approach -- not a bad thing because it would force the City to create a Gateway Blvd. underpass (under Saskatchewan Dr.) that makes a cleaner connection to the new Walterdale Bridge and that also services the Kinsmen Club.
 
Any project that will get rid of that damnable Sask Drive hairpin is A-OK in my book.

However, I know that a Gateway underpass at Sask Drive will result in local residents screaming bloody blue murder so I'm proposing that both Sask Drive and Gateway be lowered and the intersection served by either traffic signals or a roundabout.
 
This is a massing diagram that I did back in 2007 for the north end of a "living bridge project" the two pairs of towers would frame the river. PLEASE -- this is not an architectural scheme, only ideas for massing. The other buildings in the diagram are thoughts for the land going north from the High Level Bridge. I will update this for the entire span from Sask. Dr. on the south to 97th Ave. on the North Side (a completely different approach).
 
That image seems to be an idea that was going to replace the old Walterdale Bridge. The topography does not match the High Level Bridge, the arch would need to be below the road, or at least mid-way. I would also think that the entire design of the towers and bridge would have to have some sort of uniform look to be attractive but that's just my opinion.
 

Back
Top