Jump to content

Burroughs & Chapin looking at 17,000 acres in Marion County


vicupstate

Recommended Posts

My apologies to everyone who loves the Ravenel Bridge design-wise, I didn't mean to offend. It IS a wonderful thing to finally have for practical purposes, of course. Its size is quite impressive. It is a HUGE, in every way, for the economy.

The design, however, is NOT world-class, which is what Charleston deserves since it IS a world-class city. The Ravenel Bridge's dunce-cap towers are what I find completely out of place in the old harbor city. They are an industrial, severe, dull gray concrete jolt to the otherwise organic peninsular city.

Take a trip to that breath-taking beauty the Golden Gate for a comparison, or the Brooklyn Bridge. Or, for modern examples, any of those gravity-defying, awe-inspiring, bold designs being built left and right in Europe and Asia. We should have hired an experienced bridge designer (don't think they call them architects) to design the bridge, instead of letting SCDOT's in-house engineers who design overpasses (quite well, I might add) do it. I know this takes $$, but a design competition would have seemed obvious--something along the lines of "Bids out for design of largest cable-stayed bridge in North America." You know that would have garnered an international "who's who" of bridge designers with brilliant takes on our historic and vibrant city. I can't believe Joe Riley didn't raise heck to do just that. (Or perhaps he did but was "silenced" some how to keep him quiet?)

I just love Charleston (and my state) dearly, and yearn just as dearly for it to get the world-class treatment it deserves--which would have happened, with gusto, if only given the chance. [sigh]

I have some info about this since I followed it closely. I've got to run right now, but I will leave you with this: those dull, gray, dunce-cap towers were NOT the original design. Leave it to morons who live in my hometown, but the original design had the towers capped with blue lights that would've been seen for 30 miles!! They were supposed to be like light beacons showing a Chas gateway. However, some of the idiotic environmentalists and other resident morons were allowed input on the design in several public hearings. As a result, the blue lights were completely taken off and the other bridge lights showing the cables and towers were dimmed. People, the bridge could truly have been amazing...but a few of the residents changed it. Why, I'll never know! <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

^ I thought it was because it would distract sea turtles because they would think it was the moon?

I already had posted about that, but you're right. Environmentalists went hand-in-hand with others to dim the lights because they thought the sea turtles would think the bridge light is sunlight.

Which is preposterous. What about the city lights already? There is enough city light in the sky to cause that problem and the turtles aren't distracted at all. And I'm sorry, there is no such legitimate thing as light pollution. If you live in a city, streets, parking lots, and parking garages need to be properly lit. If you want to see the stars, that is what the countryside is for. As for the bridge, it is ridiculous to dim it where it is merely an apparition in the harbor. Other cities such as Tampa, Jacksonville, New York, and San Francisco light their bridges so people can see how proud the community is of their icon. What's the point in building a beautiful bridge that people can only see during the daytime?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already had posted about that, but you're right. Environmentalists went hand-in-hand with others to dim the lights because they thought the sea turtles would think the bridge light is sunlight.

Which is preposterous. What about the city lights already? There is enough city light in the sky to cause that problem and the turtles aren't distracted at all. And I'm sorry, there is no such legitimate thing as light pollution. If you live in a city, streets, parking lots, and parking garages need to be properly lit. If you want to see the stars, that is what the countryside is for. As for the bridge, it is ridiculous to dim it where it is merely an apparition in the harbor. Other cities such as Tampa, Jacksonville, New York, and San Francisco light their bridges so people can see how proud the community is of their icon. What's the point in building a beautiful bridge that people can only see during the daytime?

Adult sea turtles and other marine creatures are not attracted to lights, so I can understand your frustration with this issue. It is the hatchling sea turtles that are the concern here. They find the ocean by moving away from the darkness of the dunes and their vegetation, and artificial lights interfere with that (hence, the program to get lights turned out behind beaches.) Therefore, the bridge's lighting should not be a significant contributing factor to these young turtles' success or failure.

So, if that is what determined the "no lights" policy, it was not well-researched. I think an up-lit bridge would be nice. (Don't know about flashing blue lights or anything though, that sounds kinda tacky.) Do you know whether the lights exist, and are simply doused, or were totally left out of the design? I seem to remember admiring the lit-up bridge from downtown Charleston at night. Maybe I didn't think to look specifically for uplights. If they have had them installed, but doused, perhaps you citizens of the Port City can have them lit up once in awhile for special events if not permanently?

My apologies for getting us so far off topic with this discussion on the bridge. Even though I'm not wild about the design, I have to live with it, and I certainly expected that it would be uplit, which can be dramatic at night, even romantic (from afar ONLY).

Cheers, All

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ I know this is off-topic too, digital, but don't worry, it'll come back around. ;)

It was the hatchling sea turtles, but as you correctly pointed out, the lights behind the sand dunes on the beaches have been turned off during their season. And you hit the nail on the head in reference to the environmentalists using this fact to reduce the bridge lighting. Definitely poor research. They weren't going to be flashing blue lights, though...the top of the bridge towers were going to have blue blocks or diamonds, and from there, bright blue lights were to be shown constantly directly up into the air, giving the towers the images of being twin light beacons. It really was going to be impressive. Also, the lights showing the cables and entire towers were to have a power setting of 100,000 watts.

These people who pushed to dim the lights got their wish. I emailed the project coordinator, and he indicated the light wattage was reduced to 30,000 watts. You can barely see it around town in its present light scheme. As for the towers, the design was redone, completely eliminating the blue light fixtures from the project. I do not know if they have the capability to put them back on if people eventually change their minds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are studies that prove now that light pollution in cities are detrimental to human health. It causes problems with sleep in a lot of people which leads to a lot of other issues, none of them good. Cities are making moves now to tone down the lights at night.

And, in these days of tight energy supplies, it is particularly bad to burn fossil fuels to light up monuments. Of course that leads to another kind of pollution that we already know is causing us to choke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It causes problems with sleep in a lot of people which leads to a lot of other issues, none of them good

I did sleep better back when i was living in Pinehurst. Not that i dont sleep good in NJ but it takes a little while to get used to the excessive lightning outside plus the noise pollution. The worst is when the ground has fresh snow cover (like a foot of snow or more), the street lights beam off the snow and its SOOOOOOO bright outside at night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a trip to that breath-taking beauty the Golden Gate for a comparison, or the Brooklyn Bridge. Or, for modern examples, any of those gravity-defying, awe-inspiring, bold designs being built left and right in Europe and Asia. We should have hired an experienced bridge designer (don't think they call them architects) to design the bridge, instead of letting SCDOT's in-house engineers who design overpasses (quite well, I might add) do it. I know this takes $$, but a design competition would have seemed obvious--something along the lines of "Bids out for design of largest cable-stayed bridge in North America." You know that would have garnered an international "who's who" of bridge designers with brilliant takes on our historic and vibrant city. I can't believe Joe Riley didn't raise heck to do just that. (Or perhaps he did but was "silenced" some how to keep him quiet?)

That couldn't be furhter from the truth. Time was the biggest enemy, not money. The bnidge was constructed under a design-build delivery concept, whcih means the contractor and the architect/engeineer are on the same team. There were two entitites chosen to present designs. The design component of those teams was Figg Consulting for one team and Parsons-Brinkeerhoff for the other. Do some research and you will see that they are very experience BRIDGE DESIGNERS. SCDOT does not have the manpower or the knowledge base to design something of this magnitude in house.

The resulting winner (Parsons Brinkerhoff and Skanska Construction) have teamed several times, and this is the preferred cable-stayed bridge of this joint venture. It can be found in various places around the world. Thus, the design is not unique. The only real "choice" the

However, this is by far the largest of these designs and it is an engineering marvel. Not only is it the largest cable stayed bridge in North America, but it is built in a hostile environement subject to high seismic activity, hurricane force winds and is built on poor soil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.