TriMet's Willamette bridge: have to admit it's getting better?

The Beatles once sang on Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, "I have to admit it's getting better/a little better, all the time/can't get no worse!" And now Jeff Jahn of the PORT blog (and many other local visual art curatorial and artistic endeavors), after attending the recent July 2 meeting of the Willamette River Bridge Advisory Committee, reports that a likable new design may be emerging from a process that once seemed like it could be doomed to deliver mediocrity.

The last time the WRBAC had met, I attended the meeting and, because it followed the selection of Donald MacDonald over Miguel Rosales (designer of the then best bridge prototype in the process, the "hybrid"), was concerned that TriMet, the client, was going the route of mediocre design in order to meet budget concerns and project timelines. The Rosales hybrid prototype seemed much more original and elegant than the Arthur Ravenel cable stay bridge that McDonald had done in South Carolina, for example.

But at last week's WRBAC meeting, MacDonald's team unveiled a new prototype that may give us reason for greater optimism. "I think I saw the light at the end of the tunnel," Jahn wrote after seeing the new "A" prototype (pictured above). It has inwardly canted towers, but slightly so - not the V shape that had served as an earlier prototype. The bridge also has wide bike and pedestrian paths around the tower, cantilevered over the water dramatically.

The "A" prototype also includes, somewhat strangely, a waterfall feature in the middle of the span part of a protective enclosure. I like the enclosure idea - a place to catch your breath and enjoy the view even in the rain. The water feature could either be wonderfully iconic or it could be absurd and trite, depending on the execution.

"Of course everything you see here is very preliminary but what we do know for sure is that this new multi-use bridge (transit, pedestrian, cycling) will be a refinement of the modern cable stay design," Jahn adds. "Also, with bike and pedestrian lanes on both the north and south sides it has a shot at being the best (and only) bike, pedestrian and mass transit span in US."

The "V" tower, pictured below, is still an option (and there are multiple versions within that option), but it seemed to find less favor at the WRBAC meeting. There is also option "E" with its steel towers, but it brings extra cost and risk that TriMet is unlikely to favor. Option A, meanwhile, was given go ahead for additional design development.

"My take is that Rosales hybrid and wave frame were partly an appeal to Portlanders' sense of humility," Jahn told me by email. "Which is fine but this is a nation leading project and why not take credit for once? The A design, especially with the four observation areas, will tend to provide greater interaction with the water and less cables so it is cleaner visually than the hybrid. MacDonald also appears to be at the forefront of bicycle and pedestrian accommodations." Here is another shot of the "A" prototype:

"Until the Esplanade the city has somewhat turned its back on the Willamette and that needs to change," Jahn added. "This bridge should address that. Both the Hybrid and the A are muscular enough to stand up to the Marquam (may it be torn down in my lifetime) but I think the A puts a greater emphasis on a lighter above deck superstructure. I also think the inwardly canted towers will improve the cycle/pedestrian experience and make the A design less stumpy than the hybrid. Mass transit is an aspirational thing for most cities so implying a vertical point somewhere above the bridge is a nice iconic idea. It's going to be an image a lot of other cities will aspire to."

Now if you'll excuse me, that Sgt. Pepper reference has given me an insatiable urge to go listen to the record.

Comments

[Scott]

It's nice to see these refinements...i really like the observation points...a nice touch for a structure people will surely want to stop on and check out the structure without feeling like they are impeding traffic. The waterfall could be really amazing if well-done...we'll see...you're right brian, it does give one reason to hope!

[Avarela]

This is really good news. I've been looking forward to this project since I first heard about it maybe three years ago. Then they kept tailoring back the design more and more.

With these new designs it gives me something to look forward to again. I think the design shown is one of elegance and simplicity that makes a bold statement for a bridge that is truly one of a kind. The center piece shelter sounds like a great response to the context... rain! I hope they keep moving forward and provide the city with something to truly be proud of.

Thanks for the updates Brian.

[Double J]

Cable stay bridges can be very elegant and graceful and I hope that is the direction they go. I'm a big fan of Frank Lloyd Wright (having grown up in a house designed by one of his pupils)... and MacDonald's bay bridge and A designs have a bit of that exciting but somewhat classic language (how many churches use that vernacular).

One issue I had was the attempt to "soften" this inherently angular bridge type... instead make the towers graceful and as thin/low mass as possible

[ka]

the observation concepts will not only give a place for pause, but for the pedestrians and close in residents it will give a cause for a destination. I like it, and I like the sketches very much.

[ws]

I'll have to say...that top illustration looks very promising. Not sure I'd say it's beautiful, but it's not jarring to me like the slingshot 'V' tower's design was. Definitely very interesting, and good looking. Not sure about the waterfall feature. Seems like it might be an expensive to run gimmick.

So, I'm presuming that bike traffic will use the flesh colored lane in the illustration, with pedestrians using the white lane broken by flesh colored bars; wonder how wide those lanes could be. It seems very clever to make the bike/pedestrian lanes veer away from the main bridge roadway in the area of the pylons. This should make an extraordinary sensory experience for people on foot and bike..probably for MAX riders too.

[Eric Cantona]

sorry to get all PC on your ass WS, but i have to point out that the term "flesh colored" a bit, well, outdated.

a bit more on topic - i'm (mostly) impressed with the basic concepts at work with these new images. the good points being a more sedate tower (the V called far too much attention to itself), cables inside of the peds/bikes, and the notion of a resting/viewing spot. the bad being the curve fighting against the angular in the first image, and the waterfall. i can't see any way that will not come off as gimmicky and worth the added cost. i would prefer to see that money go towards quality materials for the bikers/peds.

[Allan]

any idea if the esplanade will have connections to the bike/ped facilities?

[Bob R.]

any idea if the esplanade will have connections to the bike/ped facilities?

Yes, connections to greenways on both sides of the river have been stated goals in various bridge presentations. The exact form of these connections hasn't been finalized (ramp placement, width, grade, etc.), as far as I know.

[jeff]

i agree this is an improvement. the new towers are better and the outlooks are nice. not sure if the angle at the approach works so well for a bike. please ditch the waterfall...unless it's serving some sort of real purpose handling stormwater, it will be hokey. and salmon color? yikes. judging by the teal water and salmon accents in the top rendering, not sure if these architects are qualified to be selecting colors...

[billb]

Love the hand drawings , and the clear expression of Design Thought in them! If the waterfalls had a purpose it would help , and now is the time to put some wind turbines on each tower and call it good.

[sut]

I'm not convinced. The design seems half worked out to me. The v-shaped bump outs seem like an afterthought added to avoid a conflict with the tower, with all sorts of structural gymnastics to accommodate them. I'm not sure how wide the bike/ped lane is, but it seems like bikes veering around the 'v' will destroy any possible sense of repose of an observation point at that location.

[Double J]

sut, there are now some images of a rounded belvedere with "sanctuary spots" that I added to the original
PORT post last night. Besides I doubt the architect would even consider those images to be 1/8th worked out. It's all very preliminary which is why feedback like yours is important... I have similar concerns but that's healthy.

[Aneeda]

Getting better? This is a horrible design. Somebody should take a moment and review the basic principals of proportion before moving any further. And the waterfall might as well be spewing vomit.

[h-lin]

Vomit is very dramatic.

I'm no fan of the waterfall (Brian aptly noted that it risks being absurd and trite) but I'm not opposed to water play.

Several millwheels might power the lights on the bridge while being sculptural and dynamic. They could be playful and splashy without being utterly gratuitous.

I'm a little more jaded about the hand sketching. (shrug) They're nice. They definitely feel more human(e) than the crude computer models we often see at this stage. I think it's no stretch to suggest that the presentation style prejudices our response to the design.

[h-lin]

An aside for Eric:

I think it's high time "PC" became an outdated term except in the pejorative.

When one defines some notion as Politically Correct one says that it's not ACTUALLY correct. "PC" notions have been disingenuously parsed so as to not upset the "other people."

[Eric Cantona]

so when "other people" use terms that are archaic and honky-centric i should refer to them as racist f***wads?

and all this time i thought i was politely pointing out a minor error.

my bad.

[ws]

Eric...whoops!..never thought of that when trying to think of how to describe the ped/bike paths...'tan' would have worked. Crayola crayons used to have a crayon with the word 'flesh' printed on it that was about that same color as it appears on my monitor. Guess that was a long time ago.

Over at bikeportland.org, a couple of people have expressed that they would have liked to see the bike lane even wider than than 7'...maybe 9', and that in the interest of safety, bike and ped lanes be separate. It's said though, that Trimet wouldn't go for extra width in that area. Maybe getting rid of the waterfall would help to make more budget available for that extra width.

[h-lin]

Eric,
I suppose in this case "who's flesh?" might have been a good middle ground before "racist f*** wad". (shrug) Your call.

And if "other people" (meaning: non-'white', non-male, non-heterosexual) want to appropriate an archaic honky-centrism or two I'm all-for-it.

[h-lin]

http://www.kent.ac.uk/english/postcolonialforum/Deleuze%20and%20Guattari.pdf

[Richard Potestio]

Hello All,

I am shocked by how contrived and poorly composed and proportioned some of the bridge designs have been. I think the first illustration shows some promise, (A Bridge option) but it remains to be seen. I think the Rosales Hybrid design was superior in every way.

Like too much of today's architecture, these current designs suffer from an overt effort to be "interesting" and substitute cleverness for real compositional/functional integrity and logic.

I do not see the need to cant the towers outward, however the slight inward cant does offer the bridge some nuanced lightness and recalls the St. Johns Bridge (not that they intended to do so).

I do not see any reason to project the ped/bike tracks out from the bridge... it will be disconcernting for a bike rider to swing around in this manner, and cause more conflicting/overlapping paths with pedestrians. The ped/bike tracks should be wide enough to allow passage around the towers without constricting flow or inducing accidents or conflicts.

The idea that one needs to pause at the center of the bridge within an enclosed viewing place is extremely trite. The bridge is for crossing, not viewing... and if there is indeed something to look at, hopefully there will be enough space for someone to pause and do so. I think of the Ponte Vechio, in Florence, or the Rialto in Venice, and think about the fact that those bridges are occupied... carry the city fabric over them, and connect to the city fabric in a very integrated way... thus a stopping point at the center of the bridge offers relief, and a chance to view out and note the fact the city is spanning the water... but this is not the case here.... And the idea that a waterfall would eminate from this is just plain silly. I wonder what the ancient Romans, whose magnificent spans transported legions, commerce and of course water, would think if they saw water spilling from the center of a bridge?

One of the consistently overlooked aspects of all the designs are the OCS towers and wires... how will these be incorporated into the design?

I would like to see a design that places the light rail on a lower deck, incorporating the OCS and places the ped/bike tracks on an upper deck like the Brooklyn Bridge.

But ultimately I ask, why can't we just do a very simple, elegant, straightforward and appropriately responsive design, and dispense with the irrelevant add ons and elaborations?

Unfortunately, I think modern archiects have more in common with the additive/decorative sensiblities of the Victorians, than with the logic and rational approach of the early modernists.

Rick