jhappy77
Active Member
And that's what they think is appropriate for a main street, a block away from a future LRT station :/
|
|
|
Urban Development and Proposals Discussion
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
YourBoy007
Active Member
Can't wait for this to be demolished.
Chowda7
Active Member
‘A big change’: Calgary’s proposal to build more housing near future Green Line station - Calgary | Globalnews.ca
The City of Calgary's proposal is also expected to bring significant change to parking, traffic flow and the layout of a street in the southeast community of Riverbend.
globalnews.ca
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
The issue doesn't seem to be the actual development but the road that will connect into this part of Riverbend. It's interesting a part of the community that has been dead quiet for its existence will now be a new entrance to at least this section of the community. That does really change how those people have lived there.‘A big change’: Calgary’s proposal to build more housing near future Green Line station - Calgary | Globalnews.ca
The City of Calgary's proposal is also expected to bring significant change to parking, traffic flow and the layout of a street in the southeast community of Riverbend.
Does the city have to connect the community to 24th Street? The community doesn't seem to be asking for it or interested in it. Granted the person in the story is one voice so maybe people really do want vehicle access to 24th Street.
The traffic circle exit could just give access to these new developments while pedestrian and wheel access could be enabled so if Riverbend residents wanted to walk or wheel to the Green Line stop they can.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
That part of Riverbend was always intended to connect to 24st, and actually was for a couple years in the late late 90s or early 2000s, but residents complained about traffic and the road was blocked off again. Anyone that lives there knew this would happen one day and I have zero sympathy for them.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Whether they knew it was coming or not. Is it necessary?
ahuch
Active Member
For what it's worth I don't think everyone in the community is against it, but the people who live directly on those streets have been pretty vocal they don't support it.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Yes, communities should have more than 2 entrances. Hell, before Quarry Park went in, there was only 1 way to get into Riverbend.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
I grew up going to Riverbend and commuted through there while going to school once Quarry Park went in. I never found the traffic bad or thought another entrance was needed. I think a vehicle entrance here is a nice to have for some but in all actuality isn't really necessary. Is essence this east part of Riverbend acts as a super block because there is no way to shortcut through the community. I see what the residents are saying but maybe I'm biased:
I live in Garrison Woods and the Flanders Ave interchange gives people the opportunity to shortcut through the community to 20th Street. It sucks, people don't do 30km/h through the playground zones (where my family's kids play), drivers roll through the stop sign at Passchendaele Ave and Passchendaele Road (where I've almost been hit numerous times going straight on Passchendaele Road in a car and on my bike), and the intersection of 20th Street and Passchendaele Ave is not built to handle the amount of traffic it does at peak drive times.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
I just think we need better connectivity between neighbourhoods and should stop relying on feeder roads. I lived in Riverbend and Douglas Glen and on days where there was an accident on Glenmore or Deerfoot, both would have their feeder roads completely gridlocked. If more roads connect through, then the pressure is taken off the primary roads and people can still move around.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Edit: I agree we need better connectivity between neighbourhoods. In this specific example, I don't think vehicle connectivity is the answer to the isolated communities problem.
To me what you've said is even more of a reason to be against this.
Collisions happen. There are times vehicles will not be able to get somewhere in the time they expected when they started the journey. I think it would be a mistake to download traffic from feeder roads on to this road:
haltcatchfire
Senior Member
But that road looks so empty though, it clearly needs some traffic.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
It's probably not a big deal either way (open/closed/pedestrian only) but generally network connectivity is a good thing - if it’s designed right. Make every non arterial have friction so cars are discouraged, go slow and a secondary users if space, but not necessarily fully restricted.
That’s my ideal plan - here’s the reality.
A 60m in diameter traffic circle with redundant higher speed slip lanes and a road width and lane geometry that makes little sense unless you’re goal to to use more asphalt than you need to.
Inexplicably, the short connection being proposed is wider than the existing road it connects to. This serves no purpose other than to slightly encourage faster car speeds for like half a block and spend more with your asphalt supplier.
Most of this is including the traffic circle is already built, pretty much none of this is transit oriented of course, despite multiple references in the article.
So yeah - add the connection. Or don’t. That’s the tree - the focus should be on forest.
If we are concerned about vehicle traffic, speeds and danger, the hypothetical connections are the least of the issues here.
That’s my ideal plan - here’s the reality.
A 60m in diameter traffic circle with redundant higher speed slip lanes and a road width and lane geometry that makes little sense unless you’re goal to to use more asphalt than you need to.
Inexplicably, the short connection being proposed is wider than the existing road it connects to. This serves no purpose other than to slightly encourage faster car speeds for like half a block and spend more with your asphalt supplier.
Most of this is including the traffic circle is already built, pretty much none of this is transit oriented of course, despite multiple references in the article.
So yeah - add the connection. Or don’t. That’s the tree - the focus should be on forest.
If we are concerned about vehicle traffic, speeds and danger, the hypothetical connections are the least of the issues here.
Urban4Lyfe
New Member
According to DOPs Instagram they are no longer moving locations in December.
So I guess whatever was supposed to be going on that site is either delayed or cancelled.
So I guess whatever was supposed to be going on that site is either delayed or cancelled.
Nawads
Active Member
Apparently, all tenants were offered to stay for another year. This seems odd given that Gallery is sold out, and was supposed to have occupancy in 2026, which would be a short timeline if they don't start till November 2024.
Gallery First & Tenth | SkyriseCalgary
Gallery First & Tenth, Calgary by 1