The Department of Transportation was very deliberate about the design of the St. Anthony Falls Bridge (the new 35w). They tried to make it far more than just safe, even though with good reason that was their top priority. In the Mn/DOT press release they say, “We will build a bridge for the future that will be a source of pride for Minnesotans.” So, in other words, they are not just making any ol’ bridge.
In the press release they also say they have designed a “bridge that fits well in the environment.” But, I guess I missed how a futuristic white bridge (hence the storm trooper) fits in with the sand stone arched and suspension bridges surrounding it or how it fits in with the surrounding neighborhoods.
In the press release, they also mention that they have hired the “most awarded bridge designers and builders in the country.” They seriously wanted to make this a beautiful bridge and they did not intend to make a “causeway.” They even have a theme: Arches, Water, Reflection. My friend Dan had a post which bluntly sums up to say: the bridge is just a bridge, so stop complaining! However, if people don’t like the design, they have some legitimate concern because its not supposed to merely get your car across the water, its supposed to be attractive, suiting its surroundings and commemorating the victims. And if it doesn’t do all that, it didn’t accomplish a lot of what they set out to do.
As you enter and exit the bridge, there will be abstract monuments remembering the bridge collapse. What a better way to remember the victims, driving 70 mph yelling at the car that just cut you off. I really like what they are doing with the river-front and the observational platforms (anything would be an improvement down there). But, I think the monuments would make a lot more sense down on the water, a place where people can walk and spend time overlooking the river and skyline.
On a positive note, I love the suspension walking bridge that would hang under the main bridge and the arched lights. However, its not clear if these are really going to happen.
To sum up my thoughts, the bridge looks a bit odd especially given all the money and thought put into it. I agree with the Professors I talked to at the College of Design at the U of M in feeling the design looks a bit rushed (which is pretty understandable). The only real design elements are awkward pillars of the future or gradient blue pillars that might match perfectly with a new IKEA but not match with the muddy Mississippi rapids. However, I do like what they are doing with the landscape around the bridge area and they definitely get an A+ for safety (and given my engineering background, that’s saying a lot).
As far as the bridge being a source of pride, I don’t particularly want Minneapolis to be know for the bridge collapse, but I do see this as a great opportunity to create a beautifully designed city center. Minneapolis has put a lot of emphasis on architecture and design as of late and I would like to see that continue. Why not make the bridge a portrait of what the city prides itself on such as lakes, culture, art, and design, etc. (within a reasonable budget). And seeing thousands cross the bridge everyday, what a great place to communicate this concern for public places and design. Take a look at the short video touring Minneapolis’s architecture (library, walker art center etc.) guided by U of M architecture and design Professor John Comazzi, who I worked with this summer.