It was a pleasure to spread the information.
After careful consideration, I think Option 2, or Option 5 may fit nicely.
Option 2:
Pros:
-No Need to demolish current 1st ave Southbound on ramp to Senator Sid Buckwold Bridge(saves money for the Big City pedestrian structure to be built?)
-Adds unique walkway(as mentioned previously "Big City" feel) to the area
-Allows pedestrians to move freely without waiting for traffic lights to change
-Less contact with automobiles
Cons:
-More Costly than Option 5(increased maintenence,initial construction,???)
-obstructs viewing angles???
-confines pedestrians to specific area
Option 5:
Further developed Option 5:
Pros:
-Increases viewing angles for pedestrians(by demolishing on-ramp and installing traffic signals to control traffic flow from 1st ave SB to Sid's Bridge)
-People must use sidewalks/streets(more vibrant surrounding area?)
-less maintenence costs than option 2(???)
Cons:
-Lose the unique "Big City" feel, to a more traditional form of infrastructure( a subjective arguement, this point could fit under Pro for some people)
-Pedestrians are more likely to be involved in an accident with fast moving traffic???
-Pedestrians are forced to wait for traffic lights
-traffic must wait for pedestrians crossing
-traffic lights would impede vehicle traffic flow at 19th and 1st
Looking at the different aspects of each, it seems some elements are acceptable depending on who you ask(pedestrians or commuters/drivers).
I do enjoy the look and feel of both, the "big city" spiriling pedestrian structures are nice, but the demolishing of the 1st ave SB on ramp and grading/leveling 19th street would also do wonders for the areas image.
It comes down to cost, if the city can save money by doing the less expensive project and putting that money to better use somewhere else(lots of Art) within River Landing, I'd prefer they do that. Unfortunately, cost estimates were not available for each proposal, maybe City/Stantec will release futher information on this issue shortly(I should have asked, I was too busy taking pictures, and listening to the seniors complain to the urban designers, one particular man was complaining about tree'd boulevards on 22nd because it ties traffic up when they have to prune them, give me a break!).
I like option 5, because the feeling of openess is apparent, yay for the Sun! As well I think it's much more pedestrian friendly, and as someone who cycles/walks regularly through downtown automobile traffic/river path pedestrian traffic, it seems the best fit. I hate dodging pedestrians/cyclists when cycling around blind corners, as might be the case with the spiraling structure.
On another note, I have a concern related to Phase II of River Landing, specifically the Terrace seating, and surrounding stage area directly adjacent to Sid's Bridge. I included three pictures of the future terrace and stage area in my post above, and my concern is about traffic noise. I don't see sound attenuation highlighted in the proposal, are they overlooking this, or do they not see this as an issue. If groups/organizations wish to have actual live events hosted at the stage, they will definately be competing with the surrounding noise coming from traffic on the bridge. I'll be mentioning this in my reply to Stantec, and I hope others do the same.
I am quite impressed, and one thing is certain, to experience River Landing in it's entirety will bring/continue the transformation of Saskatoon as a great city.
Prev
Linear Mode
