Archived

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

Lmichigan

Ambassador Bridge "Enchancement" Project (brochure)

42 posts in this topic

With the announcement that the MDEQ (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality) had given the Detroit International Bridge Company their blessing, last week, for the idea of "twinning" the Ambassador Bridge, I decided to get more aquinted with the subject of the New Detroit River International Crossing.

The Detroit River International Crossing Project study-group deemed this proposal by the DIBC to not be practical, and they stopped studying this one, but Manuel "Matty" Moroun is still moving forward with it, anyway. It needs to be said that this still needs to get approval from the federal governments of both countries, the provincial government of Ontario, and both the city of Detroit, and Windsor. The Canadians have already made it clear that Matty's proposal isn't going to happen under their watch, so I'm wondering why he's still pushing it?

427147752_f62fb0191c_o.jpg

427147742_f43fdba467_o.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


The bridge looks cool, but i think the impact might be too negative on the city.

Id like to see another tunnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there a proposal to built a brand new bridge nearby in Delray. How many international bridges can a city have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can't have 2 more, that's why this proposal is no longer being studied.

Oh, and I'm so tired of cable-stays. They were cool at first, but are the most genenric and boring bridges ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a law that says cities can't have more than 2?

BTW, people must have gotten sick of suspension bridges when they were popular. I personally think a cable-stayed would be a nice contrast. I'd hate to see another bridge that would look like the Ambassador. In fact, I wish they'd go with a more unconventional cable-stayed design instead of trying to mimic the Ambassador.

Puente del Alamillo, Seville, Spain

Calatrava_Puente_del_Alamillo_Seville.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit, that would be awesome! Id be happy with a regualr cable stayed though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure anything with Matty involved could be deemed 'healthy'. ;)

RealityCheck, I didn't know a tunnel was considered. That's interesting. Where were they proposed it before?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Looks like a nice bridge. Interesting how it absolutely dwarfs the Ambassador in those renders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say anything about there being a law that there would be 2, I said that 2 was too much for Detroit. An article even mentioned that this was Maroun's attempt to make the construction of another span in Delray unnecessary.

About Cable Stays:

I thought they were interesting when they first started getting built, but if you look at all the ones under construction, they are all the same with very little variation. What I'm trying to say is that they are no longer memorable features for a city to have. Suspension bridges are way different! Brooklyn Bridge? George Washington Bridge? Golden Gate? Mackinaw? They are completely different looking despite them all being suspension bridges. They were defined by the construction of their towers and steel laticework of the bridge structure. Cable stays are over simplified concrete structures. Very beautiful when they are a rarity. But to me, they have become as common throughout America as the typical freeway overpass. Should Detroit really settle for average?

Surprisingly, I don't find the rendering too bad. They at least spread the towers further apart so you could see the Ambassador through this thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if this has been asked, but is the old bridge reserved for Semi's only, while the newer one is just for us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
About Cable Stays:

I thought they were interesting when they first started getting built, but if you look at all the ones under construction, they are all the same with very little variation. What I'm trying to say is that they are no longer memorable features for a city to have. Suspension bridges are way different! Brooklyn Bridge? George Washington Bridge? Golden Gate? Mackinaw? They are completely different looking despite them all being suspension bridges. They were defined by the construction of their towers and steel laticework of the bridge structure. Cable stays are over simplified concrete structures. Very beautiful when they are a rarity. But to me, they have become as common throughout America as the typical freeway overpass. Should Detroit really settle for average?

Surprisingly, I don't find the rendering too bad. They at least spread the towers further apart so you could see the Ambassador through this thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tunnel, the Ambassador Bridge, and the Mackinaw Bridge were all impressive technological things when they were made. I think what we make today should also be noteworthy somehow. Of course there aren't any records to be made with the Detroit River, I'm sure there's still something cool that could be done. I don't want any goofy looking thing, just something noteworthy somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does it have to be a poor mimick suspension bridge? It can be anything really. The design spectrum these days isn't just limited to cable stays. I realize there are a few variations of this bridgetype as you illustrated above. But you have to understand the type of engineering that goes into cable stays causes most of them to end up looking the same.

Cable stays are essentially suspended segmented concrete bridges. The box concrete sections typically don't vary bridge to bridge. In fact high level concrete bridges use the same modular sections like the Zilwaukee Bridge here in Michigan or the Hayward-San Mateo and Dumbarton in the SF bay area. But as we know these bridges are forgettable. No one ever talks of them because they don't exhibit the beauty of structural engineering. Cable stays however, did bring beauty in design to this technology in the fact that the bridge deck could now be suspended from needle shaped towers with an array of cables. The only probllem is that the design was replicated city to city, with a few minor exceptions. Basically you have a tall concrete tower, and box concrete bridge deck, and some cables. The approaches to the actual bridge structure are for the most part hideous. The spectrum is very narrow for how a cable stay can be memorable or identifiable in a particular city.

Architecture and engineering are different when it comes to design. Architecture has the ability to be different. If it's cookie cutter, it isn't necessarily good architecture. Bridges are larger more noteworthy structures and they are the result of engineering. What made bridges beautiful of the past was how forces were transmitted through a remarkable complex of steelwork that created beautiful forms. Enginering is all about economy and technogoical advances in structural systems so it would be foolish to build bridges like the past. The problem is people are too wowed by cable stays to search for anything more unique. There's a multitude of varying designs that could be done with some extra engineering, but in the end we will get the base model of the cable stay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


For aesthetic and nostalgic purposes alone, I'd rather see a new or wider tunnel considered before another span. I actually don't mind the design of the bridge itself (although I agree with wolverine that it's unremarkable), but I'd hate to see the Ambassador dwarfed beneath it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why does it have to be a poor mimick suspension bridge? It can be anything really. The design spectrum these days isn't just limited to cable stays. I realize there are a few variations of this bridgetype as you illustrated above. But you have to understand the type of engineering that goes into cable stays causes most of them to end up looking the same.

Cable stays are essentially suspended segmented concrete bridges. The box concrete sections typically don't vary bridge to bridge. In fact high level concrete bridges use the same modular sections like the Zilwaukee Bridge here in Michigan or the Hayward-San Mateo and Dumbarton in the SF bay area. But as we know these bridges are forgettable. No one ever talks of them because they don't exhibit the beauty of structural engineering. Cable stays however, did bring beauty in design to this technology in the fact that the bridge deck could now be suspended from needle shaped towers with an array of cables. The only probllem is that the design was replicated city to city, with a few minor exceptions. Basically you have a tall concrete tower, and box concrete bridge deck, and some cables. The approaches to the actual bridge structure are for the most part hideous. The spectrum is very narrow for how a cable stay can be memorable or identifiable in a particular city.

Architecture and engineering are different when it comes to design. Architecture has the ability to be different. If it's cookie cutter, it isn't necessarily good architecture. Bridges are larger more noteworthy structures and they are the result of engineering. What made bridges beautiful of the past was how forces were transmitted through a remarkable complex of steelwork that created beautiful forms. Enginering is all about economy and technogoical advances in structural systems so it would be foolish to build bridges like the past. The problem is people are too wowed by cable stays to search for anything more unique. There's a multitude of varying designs that could be done with some extra engineering, but in the end we will get the base model of the cable stay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RealityCheck, I didn't know a tunnel was considered. That's interesting. Where was it proposed before?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't stand the fact that it they are standing next to each other and are the same type of bridege but look completely different. I would like to see and exact replica of the ambasidor, or a completely different style of bridge. This new bridge would look really nice further south

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Jobs Tunnel (DRTP) group proposed converting the twin-tube train tunnel it currently owns and uses so that it could provide a two-lane border crossing for trucks only. Under that vision, a taller and wider rail tunel would be bored alongside the existing one to accommodate auto carriers and double-stacked containers that don't fit in the Old School portal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The varying designs in bridge appearance are the direct result of new technologies and engineering. Really, any sort of bridge design is possible if whoever is paying for it is willing to spend more money. With that said, I was hoping that if Detroit does choose to build a cable stay in the future, whether next to or downriver from the Ambassador, the design would be different from those being constructed elsewhere. The example you posted is a great one, where engineers chose a route that was innovative and incorporated design aesthetics. I can't recall what country it is in, or if it has even built yet, but there is a cable stay design that has a modern truss for the bridge deck and uses fewer (but thicker) cables to support it. The design is graceful, and would be a nicer gesture towards the Ambassador bridge if it were constructed next to it. Of course there is also arched bridges (like the Bluewater) that are still being constructed, but they unfortunately sometimes use more material and in this instance may not be economical. It's an area where bridge designers have a greater opportunity of producing something unique, but i doubt the product would look all that great next to the Ambassador.

If you think i'm a hater of cable stays, that's not true. I'm just tired of them being replicated with very few variations. My point about suspension bridges was that historically, there has been more variations in their design. Maybe I'm being harsh on cable stays because not enough time has passed since larger versions have become more popular (smaller versions have been around for probably 100's of years) If you were to sum up everything I've been saying in this thread it would be that Detroit needs a new bridge that is identifiable and unique. I thought my point was subtle enough that it wouldn't spark this much elaboration on the topic, but i guess I was wrong. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Jobs Tunnel (DRTP) group proposed converting the twin-tube train tunnel it currently owns and uses so that it could provide a two-lane border crossing for trucks only. Under that vision, a taller and wider rail tunel would be bored alongside the existing one to accommodate auto carriers and double-stacked containers that don't fit in the Old School portal.

In other words, they share nofunk's notion of adapting existing infrastructure as a practical, prudent, cost-effective solution . . . even though he likely refers to the car tunnel:

I'd rather see a new or wider tunnel considered before another span.

The Detroit River Tunnel Partnership, which owns its corridor land, is considering options to proceed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Jobs Tunnel (DRTP) group proposed converting the twin-tube train tunnel it currently owns and uses so that it could provide a two-lane border crossing for trucks only. Under that vision, a taller and wider rail tunel would be bored alongside the existing one to accommodate auto carriers and double-stacked containers that don't fit in the Old School portal.

In other words, they share nofunk's notion of adapting existing infrastructure as a practical, prudent, cost-effective solution . . . even though he likely refers to the car tunnel:

I'd rather see a new or wider tunnel considered before another span.

The Detroit River Tunnel Partnership, which owns its corridor land, is considering options to proceed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.