NEW Sacramento River Bridge First of its Kind (San Francisco, Redding: house, neighborhood)

[Chimérique]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO5ba0fKmH4

What do you think of the new final design?

Another cool structure in Sacramento that will be inconspicuous, hidden. You'll barely be able to see it from a distance as the towers are only 100 feet tall. Aren't iconic structures supposed to be large or tall, and VISIBLE? This is so Sacramento.

That was my first reaction, but it's growing on me. I'm starting to like it a lot.

First of its Kind in the world says the lead bridge architect - "It's a lift bridge and an arch bridge combined together".

[Chimérique]

Highlights of the Bridge:

1. The deck will be 300 feet long, and will rise to let ship/boat traffic to pass. The twin center arches look a bit like an eye gazing over the river, and each curves inward toward the other over the roadway to offer a cathedral-like feel.

2. At night, that eyelid on each tower is bathed in a thin stream of light and the glass portions of the columns glow in gold.

3. Walkways for pedestrians, buffered bike lanes, three lanes for traffic lanes for traffic and street cars.

4. It will have a sitting areas in the central section. Some sections of the wide walkways are made of clear glass, offering a fun, or maybe vertiginous, view of the river underfoot, similar to the Calatrava designed Sundial Bridge over the Sacramento River.

5. The renderings highlight a slim, white span with four curving columns that house the mechanisms to raise the deck for passing ships. The twin center arches look a bit like an eye gazing over the river, and each curves inward toward the other over the roadway to offer a cathedral-like feel.

6. The bridge’s sub-roadway under structure is being designed to create nesting space for bats and Purple martin birds that live along that stretch of the river.

7. Shamble(the Architect) said the bridge’s flowing curvilinear feel is designed to mesh with the river below. The sitting areas on the bridge as away from the traffic, and allow people to ponder the river “almost like the river is on stage.”

[Adriatica]

Not a fan. The middle is fine, but those 4 towers are just over-designed. I don't mind modern, but some kind of nod to classic bridge design would have been great in this particular setting. Maybe I'd like it better in person, who knows.

I like the sitting areas.

Some modifications will likely be made once the budget hits the fan, as often happens with projects of this size.

[Chimérique]

Thanks for the response.

What does "over designed" mean? The Golden Gate Bridge was built in the 1930's and it was considered "modern" for its time. Sacramento's Tower Bridge was built in the 1930's and it was considered "modern" for it's time. Were these bridges over-designed? They both came about when the nation was in its worst depression, and yet they were still built, and they have a timeless aesthetic quality to them.

The most recent new bridges in Dallas, San Francisco, France, Boston, China are all "modern" by todays aesthetic. Regarding "modern" versus "node to classic" what exactly is "classic", and why does it need to be "classic" considering Sacramento is only 171 years old which is very young as "classic" goes.

How about the very modern Calatrava designed bridge in Redding over the Sacramento River. Little'ole Redding has folks coming from all over the world to see that bridge. Is it "over-designed"?

[Chimérique]

The more and more I study this bridge, the more I like it.

It's definitely unique and one of kind, and over time, when you see an image of this bridge you will know its a Sacramento landmark, just as the Capitol Building and the Tower Bridge are landmarks today.

[wburg]

I like this bridge design just fine.



I don't think a contemporary bridge in this context and location has any obligation whatsoever to commemorate "classic bridge design," but just looking at this bridge, it does include architectural nods to its predecessors--the four main pillars echo the pillars of the Tower Bridge, while the trusses in the central span reflect the early 20th Century design of the I Street bridge and even the Tower Bridge's predecessor, the M Street Bridge (which looked like the I Street Bridge's little brother, a truss swing bridge with a single railroad track in the center flanked by narrow pedestrian/wagon paths.) If you squint, you can even see elements of the Mid-century Modern minimalist bridge design of the Pioneer Bridge (the largest, most heavily traveled and most recently built bridge over the Sacramento River in downtown Sacramento, but for some reason never ever mentioned in discussions of Sacramento bridge architecture.)


I'm more concerned with its modal flexibility: sufficient space for all modes of transit, including pedestrians, bicycles, and public transit, in addition to automobiles. Does it perform its function as a bridge? Unlike the Calatrava designed Sundial Bridge, which is pedestrian only and serves only a minimal transportation function, this bridge will serve a critical purpose improving mobility between downtown Sacramento and a growing residential neighborhood immediately to the west across the river, addressing the region's traditional eastward growth and resulting lopsided transportation flow. I suppose I'd be happier if we also had a streetcar running across the Tower Bridge again, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

[WizardOfRadical]

Sick.

[pistola916]

I think the bridge looks nice. I do wish the arch was little higher and the towers litle taller, so it can be viewed from I-5.

[Sactoslacker]

Will the towers be accessible to the public?
It would be cool to have a cocktail bar or something at the top of one of the towers.

[michelle-edh]

beautiful architecture, adds something special to the city.