Blue Bridge to be rehabbed

[GRDadof3]

The Blue Bridge downtown is about to undergo renovation. It was deemed a historic structure in 1991, which means that the new color may have to adhere to historic standards.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/03/grand_valley_state_university_34.html

[Allison Slater]

It's known as the "Blue Bridge" more than any other name. In fact a few people from out of town have commented on how the blue is nice on the bridge. I think it'd be a unfortunate thing to remove the blue paint, and I don't see what value any non-blue paint would really bring it other than to say "this is what it used to look like."

[GRDadof3]

It's known as the "Blue Bridge" more than any other name. In fact a few people from out of town have commented on how the blue is nice on the bridge. I think it'd be a unfortunate thing to remove the blue paint, and I don't see what value any non-blue paint would really bring it other than to say "this is what it used to look like."

You live by the sword, you die by the sword (of historic designation). I wonder if they can find a steel bridge of the same era that was blue, if they could use that as precedence? I have no idea really.

[RegalTDP]

You live by the sword, you die by the sword (of historic designation). I wonder if they can find a steel bridge of the same era that was blue, if they could use that as precedence? I have no idea really.

Now I'm confused. Why would keeping it blue be a problem? I thought the Commission's standard, in general, is that new work has to "match existing or original material design," and it was already blue when it became a landmark. Wouldn't there only be a problem if they wanted to introduce a brand new color?

The MLive article only mentions that the historic designation "could play a role in color selection," but doesn't say that it would pose as an obstacle to sticking with blue.

[GRDadof3]

Now I'm confused. Why would keeping it blue be a problem? I thought the Commission's standard, in general, is that new work has to "match existing or original material design," and it was already blue when it became a landmark. Wouldn't there only be a problem if they wanted to introduce a brand new color?

The MLive article only mentions that the historic designation "could play a role in color selection," but doesn't say that it would pose as an obstacle to sticking with blue.

How I understand it, the color is "grandfathered" in, just like a home in a historic district doesn't have to undergo a new paint job. However, if you want to repaint, you have to go with a "period" color. The blue that it has now was never the original color, it was painted that way in the late 80's.

Jay Fowler gives Sixth Street Bridge as an example:

"Downtown's Sixth Street Bridge, a similar structure that was painted raspberry-red in the 1980s, was given a more historically accurate dark green pigment when it was repainted in 2002."

[winjer]

This thing was historically for trains! Are we going to put those back too?

[andrew.w]

My experience is that historic preservation laws tend to be more suggestive rather than prescriptive. Nowhere do they usually say: "thou shalt return said landmark to its original color." In fact preservation laws and guidelines often embrace later alterations if those changes are major contributors to the structures history and/or significance. In this case, the fact that the Blue Bridge is blue is pretty significant.

At the end of the day, it will be some person or committee who will interpret the guidelines and decide what is the most appropriate action. The article makes it sound like the bridge is a local landmark only, so it is the local preservation committee (city or state) which will probably make that call.

[MiGuyz]

How I understand it, the color is "grandfathered" in, just like a home in a historic district doesn't have to undergo a new paint job. However, if you want to repaint, you have to go with a "period" color. The blue that it has now was never the original color, it was painted that way in the late 80's.

GRDadof3, I'm not looking ruffle any feathers. I simply want to help end a long standing myth in this City:

A home could be repainted the same color or a "period" color or an entirely new color in any Grand Rapids Historic District. The idea that the Commission requires specific color choices is not accurate.

[RegalTDP]

GRDadof3, I'm not looking ruffle any feathers. I simply want to help end a long standing myth in this City:

A home could be repainted the same color or a "period" color or an entirely new color in any Grand Rapids Historic District. The idea that the Commission reguires specific color choices is not accurate.

Gotcha. So my understanding is, the bridge's status as a landmark wouldn't force the DDA to change the color, but they just might want to make it a historic color for sh*ts and giggles, if that's what they decide.

So it's really all up to the DDA's aesthetic tastes. I think Mr. Fowler was being coy in the article because, well, the Press asked him about it and he had to be.

For the record, I've never associated GVSU with this bridge, but I support keeping it blue. On the other hand, I didn't like the red 6th Street Bridge (it looked like rust) and I'm glad they changed it.

[Raildudes dad]

I'm pretty sure the original color was black. I have seen old truss highway bridges painted silver or gray but RR bridges have always been black.

[wingbert]

Why is this even an issue? Do we not have bigger fish to fry in this town without creating a controversy over the color of this bridge? Why bring it up at all? If they'd just gone ahead and repainted it the same color it is without bringing this up I highly doubt anyone would have complained.

[GRDadof3]

Whoa. The Blue Bridge isn't blue anymore:

[gvsusean]

Whoa. The Blue Bridge isn't blue anymore:

hmm, doesnt look too bad lol

[Allison Slater]

=[ I wonder how many times someone is going to refer to it as the blue bridge and confuse the other person looking for it.

[RegalTDP]

http://www.mlive.com/business/west-michigan/index.ssf/2013/01/downtown_development_authority_14.html#incart_river_default

 

Keeping it blue is the right choice.  And I really like the new lighting scheme planned.  It's like the Empire State Building, except at street level.

[GRDadof3]

I think it's cool. It could even become an attraction during 4th of July, Celebration on the Grand, ArtPrize, etc; change the lighting to go along with music.

[GRDadof3]

June 1st is the closing date for construction to begin. Find altnerate walking routes.

[John E]

[GRDadof3]

 

The first thing I thought of was the show Supertrain from the 70's.

[Allison Slater]

If you ever wondered what it'd look like if we clad our bridges in aluminum panels in the 60s, this is probably pretty close!

[RegalTDP]

The first thing I thought of was the show Supertrain from the 70's.

 

Ha, reminded me of a Japanese bullet train.  I say we paint the shroud.

 

 

[GR8scott]

haha I was thinking that too

[Scotland Tom]

They started removing the cover on the bridge today. They still have to do the western portion of the span, but overall it's looking good. Definitely a bolder blue than we're used to. I think the old paint had faded a fair amount. I'd provide a picture, but I don't get great opportunities to take photos while at work.

 

Shame they scheduled the rehab over the 4th. A lot of folks missed out on one of their favorite viewing locations for the fireworks.

[John E]

Bill Kirk posted a photo on Facebooky:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=539021339493976&set=a.370421116354000.85324.100001583454130&type=1&theater

[fotoman311]

Bill Kirk posted a photo on Facebooky:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=539021339493976&set=a.370421116354000.85324.100001583454130&type=1&theater

 

Bill's photo is viewable for the general public on Instagram:

http://instagram.com/p/bol_KJtsCZ/