Quote:
Originally Posted by frinkprof
That's because it's really not. They forgot - or more likely didn't especially consider - the 'O' part - oriented. London is Transit Adjacent Development.
The full article outlines that the formal planning efforts toward the Station Area Plans was prompted in a significant way by the mistakes made with the London project.
|
Beyond aesthetics, I don't think London's design is really that problematic. The issue is really the lack of proper infrastructure in the area for both pedestrians and automobiles. This is really the city dropping the ball more than the developer. It really doesn't make sense to improve any of the pedestrian links, other than the bridge which should at least help London's residents reach the station, when the city is still planning to rip it all up for an interchange.
The planned interchange actually looks like something that would solve most of the current issues. The level LRT/freight rail crossing on Heritage probably should have been addressed when the C-Train was first built and is definitely required today. The traffic circle design should solve a lot of the issues from Horton Road's right in right out access to Heritage; access to north bound Macleod during times of congestion is currently problematic and the ability to use the circle to reach westbound Heritage. The only problem I have with it are the detours the plan seems to require for pedestrians on Heritage to cross Macleod. Beyond that, it should allow the rest of the station area to develop without causing issues. The city really should have built it, or cancelled the plans and at least put some proper sidewalks in, prior to allowing much development in the area.
Here are the city's plans:
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/...e-Drive---Macleod-Trail-Interchange.aspx
Threaded Mode