frinkprof - the retired project engineer for that section of the line was working directly with us. He made the presentation with us to the LPT committee of council on May 21, 2008 - a matter of public record.
I see the Hillhurst/Sunnyside experience as being different for a varity of reasons.
Our main issue was that the November 2007 plan was not the best way to solve the problem. The changes made in June 2008 confirm that a lot of the elevated portion was in fact unnecessary. At that time, we were also surprised to find out (as was council) that it was only one of three options prepared by administration. Two were never presented to council until after the November 2007 vote. Each option had some elevated and at grade components, but I don't recall the other two having the extent of elevation contained in the "option of one" plan.
We felt then, and maintain now, that the elevated portion through Sunalta continues to be unnecessary. Possibly the need to have this section elevated was to protect existing CPR leasehold interests along 10 Avenue – perhaps more difficult to deal with on a fixed schedule than simple residential interests. It's private property and needs to be respected - only a leasehold interest holder would know what the issues were.
Our council presentation in May 2008 was to show the viability of an at grade option along the CPR right of way which would divert onto adjacent private land sufficiently to get under Crowchild and reach acceptable grades in a tunnel or trench adjacent to or on the golf course. Interestingly enough, we were told that the golf course would be "untouchable"; now comical in light of current events.
Subsequently, our choice became the current plan or no changes at all. It was then obvious that the current plan was less impactful on two of three inner city communities.
In the case of Hillhurst/Sunnyside a bridge was required to cross the river and climb the hill, using the bridge to adjust grades to acceptable levels. My understanding (a bit rusty after a year and half) was that in response to community feedback there, that bridge was modified and may be at a higher grade than the LRT standard to address both technical and community concerns. (I'm open to input on this if somebody has more facts than I do)
Say, hypothetically that the Hillhurst/Sunnyside bridge was unnecessary - do you think community residents would want it? Is it really logical to say that because it was already there, and not a problem for you, the community wildly endorses that bridge? Remember, opposition in Hillhurst/Sunnyside was against the LRT completely, and as such was probably a lot more radical than we were.
We are still very concerned about the elevated portion of the line in Sunalta, which is not really residential, but mixed use industrial + low rise residential. Since Victoria Park redevelopment some problems have moved West. Development has stagnated on the West side of Sunalta, adjacent to the three existing "Bow/Crow" bridges. These structures were built without a defined Area Redevelopment plan, and as a result there has been almost no development in that part of the community since the 1960s and 1970s. The Sunalta ARP is an excellent first step in avoiding a problem, if the money is available to implement it.
My main concern centers around Sunalta station; Calgary's first elevated station. We would want to avoid some of the issues experienced by a station like Broadway and Commercial in Vancouver; which is also in a area with drug and gang issues, adjacent to a bus station and a railway right of way.
As to your grafitti comments - I run under the Hillhurst/Sunnyside bridge twice a week; it is covered with graffiti patches. Maybe guys who post here don't see these (no exercise, perhaps?). I sense an almost "religious" denial here concerning the desecration of our structures. If we accept graffiti as a fact, designers can deal with it.
SubwayRev - hopefully the above demonstrates that graffiti was not a big issue with us - but it was a source of reaction for many (including yourself, apparently). When you set out to win a advocacy campaign you can't always do things perfectly - but I'm glad you have set such high expectations for our rank group of amateurs.
fusili - I agree - it can be done well; but not the way we do it. Those plans took years to develop. Maybe I'm wrong, but it sure looks like our plan was substantially pulled together in October 2007, boiled down to “an option of one” in roughly a month, and approved in November 2007 for execution in December 2009. It could be that Germany has a different political system than us.
As to your comments on grafitti - when does it desecrate versus enhance? Who decides where to draw that line? You? The Mayor? Council? Again, it could be that the German public is more willing to defer to "authorities" on these matters than we are.
Last edited by Mike Wilhelm; Sep 1, 2009 at 7:16 AM.
|
Prev
Linear Mode
