Gary goes in to bat for the Immigration Bridge

johnboy said :

Holierthanthou said :

Isn’t WBG really quite relevant to planning to Canberra, in particular this central area. Invoking Godwin’s law for something like this is what the nazis would have done if they were interbloggers.

Given that WBG was forced to resign in 1920 after his plan was effectively scrapped anyone trying to justify a plan based on his vision is, in my opinion, either extremely ignorant, or fraudulent.

I used to work in Archives many moons ago and got to look at the original WBM drawings quite a bit. While the basics are there, I’m not overly convinced the city as it was built really reflects much of WBGs vision, save the big wet bit in the middle, that is.

Holierthanthou said :

Isn’t WBG really quite relevant to planning to Canberra, in particular this central area. Invoking Godwin’s law for something like this is what the nazis would have done if they were interbloggers.

Given that WBG was forced to resign in 1920 after his plan was effectively scrapped anyone trying to justify a plan based on his vision is, in my opinion, either extremely ignorant, or fraudulent.

I personally can’t believe that they wouldn’t jump at the opportunity for an Immigration Mud-Watching Underlake Tube! Bridges are so last millenium. We could be world leaders, but noooo …. The problem with this city is that people have no vision. It’s always the same old, same old. How boring!

Normally you’d think you would build a bridge because you really need one, to get from A to B.

If you have to cast around for a suitable spot to put a bridge, and none comes to mind, then maybe a bridge is just not the right idea for this project to commemorate immigration.

I’m disgusted that my suggestion of an Immigration Mud-Watching Underlake Tube has not been taken up. This bridge is an utter pile of plop that will wreck a very nice bit of the lake.

If they must build a gratuitous bridge, why not stick it over the Jerra wetlands so people don’t get attacked by snakes or something?

How about naming the traffic lights across Commonwealth Ave (between the Futsal Slab and Floriade) the Immigration Memorial Traffic Lights? The symbolism would be amazing.

Picture this… people crossing the the gulf between the car park to ‘the other side’ in great waves of human traffic. BUT they are only legally allowed to proceed when shown the Green Light (representing Immigration Approval). Those who proceed prior to being shown the symbolic ‘green light’ must then face the risk of being caught by the actual traffic, which represents Customs and Immigration officials.

You know it makes sense….

The bridge is unwanted and in the way – not a good rap for the immigrants.

jjoking said :

what about a bridge from the city side of the lake near where people park for floriade accross that bay to the museum, it would make it easier for people to access the museum, the current bridge seems to go from the museum to the middle of nowhere!

That makes much more sense, it would make the museum more walkable from the CBD which would be an advantage for tourists without their own transport. I’m still concerned about the visual impact of it though. I feel it needs… curves? Commonwealth and Kings Avenue bridges are the straight solid symmetrical bookend structures on either side of central basin. I feel that any other structures should be more curved and flowing and discreet and natural looking. The current plan makes no sense to me regarding it’s purpose, doesn’t appeal to me at all visually and creates problems for watercraft.

It’s a complete crock.

Practically everything built is already a testament to immigrants.

Isn’t WBG really quite relevant to planning to Canberra, in particular this central area. Invoking Godwin’s law for something like this is what the nazis would have done if they were interbloggers.

johnboy said :

I think it’s fair enough that a monument to immigration should go from one place to another and actually cross something.

which does rather limit possible sites.

Lets just have a series of immigration themed Aust. Post stamps then, JB. They can go from point A to point B, cross the globe and not cost us as much as a bridge.

I’m an immigrant but I recognise the opportunity cost of this bridge. I’d rather see the funding used for other things like hospital beds, upgrading someone who’s been in hospital for almost two years house, etc..

Maybe we could have a little foot bridge that crosses the Jerrabomberra creek over to the Maconochie Centre, tying in nicely our past and present. Warm fuzzies for everyone.

sorry posted with out finishing a bridge accross this bay would be great for tourisum in canberra and link the museum to the city.

what about a bridge from the city side of the lake near where people park for floriade accross that bay to the museum, it would make it easier for people to access the museum, the current bridge seems to go from the museum to the middle of nowhere! a bridge accross this bay

I think it’s fair enough that a monument to immigration should go from one place to another and actually cross something.

which does rather limit possible sites.

sepi said :

I’ve thought about this, and if what the pro-bridge lot want is an attractive bridge to serve as a monument, and the objectors want the lake to stay open to boats, then why not satisfy both with a nice bridge that goes along the lake.

The bridge could go about 10 metres out from shore and then follow the lake shore at a nice part of the lake (maybe behind the national gallery).

It would be attractive and serve as a monument to immigration in our history. It would be accessible and people would actually walk along it. And it wouldn’t get in the way of boats.

Ha! A bit like the Brisbane River boardwalk?

Gary is a big supported of a mutli cultural society he is at the UC international night every year, but mate you have got in wrong on this stinker

I’ve thought about this, and if what the pro-bridge lot want is an attractive bridge to serve as a monument, and the objectors want the lake to stay open to boats, then why not satisfy both with a nice bridge that goes along the lake.

The bridge could go about 10 metres out from shore and then follow the lake shore at a nice part of the lake (maybe behind the national gallery).

It would be attractive and serve as a monument to immigration in our history. It would be accessible and people would actually walk along it. And it wouldn’t get in the way of boats.

Al, you’re dead right with your comments, particularly the way in which Gazza reckons he’s in the right and everyone else doesn’t know what they’re talking about. I’m personally against it, because it limits use of the lake and because the proponents will be expecting that govts (Fed and ACT) will need to pay for some of it, whether in-kind (land), in establishing the bridge, or maintaining it. If it’s such a great idea, then those that want it should pay and take full responsibility for it, while reducing adverse impacts.

JB, I like your local version of Godwin’s Law – every ratbag developer, ratbag polly, or whoever, drags it out to support their particular (usually warped) position on anything to do with the Lake or its surrounds.

If it had a decent cafe/ bar in the middle that would be cool.

It is a stupid idea and Gary must be losing the plot – or just desperate for something to have a whinge about.

The Brisbane footbridge is great, and I would actually like to walk over a footbridge on our lake, but this useless bridge goes from nowhere to nowhere, and there is no parking at either end, so the pedestrians will actually have to make a real effort to even get to the start of the bridge to try to walk accross.

Now a road bridge from Yarralumla to Acton sounds much more useful. Or a footbridge from the lake at Kingston would be a nice attraction.

But this imigration bridge is a crock – it is just a giant decoration. If they want to still control Canberra they should revoke self-govt. Otherwise – let us decide if we want this thing. I don’t want it, and I haven’t met anyone who does.

The idea that this bridge will be a beautiful and significant part of Canberra’s landscape, will be a landmark welcomed by the locals, and will be such a fitting tribute to the legacy of every little ethnic Granddad\Grandma…

Well, if you believe that, someone will try to sell you landmark bridge.
Oh wait, thats exactly what they’re doing.

I really do suspect that this should be catalogued as another Canberra Scam, instead of invoking the Griffin Plan, as we’ve clearly diverged from what he intended 100 years ago, and besides, what is shown on that Plan looks more like a road traffic bridge between Yarralumla & Acton than a pedestrian footbridge.

Gary’s new found position on the topic is fair enough, but I don’t accept his slagging off at everyone who doesn’t agree with it.

He wasn’t calling everyone “people who apparently cannot see the wood for the trees” and complaining about “unfortunate tendency of some people to reject any notion of change in the appearance of Canberra” BEFORE the inquiry.

Gary seems to be wedded to the Howard-era wedge approach – ‘you’re either with us or you’re agin us’. This little rant has devalued his position and I find it disappointing.

Why does everything have to be adversarial? Setting up for the next pointless brawl with Kate Lundy on 666?

Far more civil to just say something like “I came to the inquiry without a position and I listened to everyone. There were points put that I found myself agreeing with, points I didn’t but were well made nonetheless. And there were some positions I thought were stretching the argument. On the whole I think the proponents made a more compelling case and I therefore support them.”

Personally, I don’t have a position and haven’t been across the whole issue enough to form one, although I can understand concerns of the yatching fraternity – one of the few sources of ‘colour and movement’ on the lake. However, I’ve seen similar arguments over the Brisbane footbridge between QUT and the Southbank, which now swarms with people.

As for the link to immigrants, unless we are Indigenous, we all come from migrant stock. It could perhaps be argued that those brought here forcibly for minor misdemeanors, whose toils and indeed lives helped establish the nation, may be as much if not more deserving of some form of recognition in this the nation’s capital (with or without bridge).

The WIN and CT polls that I saw were at least 70% against IIRC.

Got a link to that polling? I knew the boaties were agin it but I didn’t think the white shoe set was a big constituency.