News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

Which concept would you prefer?

  • Concept A

    Votes: 21 56.8%

  • Concept B

    Votes: 4 10.8%

  • Concept C

    Votes: 6 16.2%

  • Leave as is

    Votes: 1 2.7%

  • Put underground

    Votes: 5 13.5%
  • Total voters
    37
Oddball said:
Hahaha, I didn't catch how many people were chilling on the median in the B rendering either. I don't get a very pedestrian vibe from the B layout overall though. Too me it's just a weird quirt of the person who did the render.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's probably just going to end up as green space if that's what they go with.
 
For either option of A or C Macleod Trail could potentially be half decent for pedestrians if they do wide enough sidewalks and have retail facing Macleod. It would never be great could be decent enough.

The thing that appeals to me on option C, is the LRT path. That is something that could have potential. Cycle tracks and retail along side might work.

nickheer said:
None of these options are particularly terrific.

Options B and C have the same problem, in that they assume that Macleod Trail can be pedestrianized, but it can't be along the south-of-Beltline stretch. Nobody's going to be hanging out on the lawn between Macleod and the tracks, as illustrated in B, so that's going to be a dead zone.

Option A protects pedestrians best, but I worry that the under-bridge area will also become a dead zone, particularly in the winter. Yes, these are illustrations, but think about all of the other under-the-bridge areas in the city and how dead they are: East Village, below the Sunalta overpass, under Centre Street…

Option A is probably the best compromise, but it's also the most expensive of the three, I'm sure. I like that it creates a barrier between Macleod and the more pedestrian train area.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Option C is probably the best overall choice when you look at costs etc.

Having a cycle track run alongside the Ctrain would be good except I don't know where it would go. It would only be a short stretch. If you had option A elevated all the way over to where it goes underground you could have at least a cycle track that gets you past the Stampede and almost into downtown.
 
But... option C isn't even grade separated from what I can see...
 
Some of the feedback from the public:

concept a.jpg


concept b.jpg


concept c.jpg
 

Attachments

  • concept a.jpg
    concept a.jpg
    300.6 KB · Views: 529
  • concept b.jpg
    concept b.jpg
    316.7 KB · Views: 525
  • concept c.jpg
    concept c.jpg
    258.7 KB · Views: 515
I prefer Concept A. Perhaps not as nice for the pedestrian realm, but it accomplishes what it set out to do and that's clear up congestion at 25th. Concept B is not favourable at all, and Concept C is good, except it doesn't solve the problem of 25th ave.
 
Very excited to hear this is on the books! I'm curious whether the City will attempt a 17th ave connection by burying or elevating the line further north. It would really help with the CMLC and the Stampede Board's plans to better integrate the Stampede with the Vic Park. In fact, It has the potential to be one of the most trans-formative infrastructure in the City; it would remove much of the physical (and psychological) barriers that makes the Grounds feel so isolated from the surrounding area, and would make the Stampede's planned conference and hotel expansion more feasible by allowing easy pedestrian access to the Beltline as opposed to people being herded around fences and up stairs.

But back on topic! Option A seems like the best option. Never really appreciated how much disused space there is surrounding that intersection until seeing that render.

Edit: It does appear that burying the Red Line adjacent to Macleod Trail and the Stampede Grounds is being considered! PP.38 if you're interested https://beltline.ca/media/17 AVE Design Strategy.pdf
 
Last edited:
These concepts need to consider Victoria Park Station? If 17th Ave is to extend into the Stampede Grounds, that station will require reconfiguration (ex. moved to the north, elevated, buried). An elevated Erlton could face technical challenges transitioning to a buried Victoria Park, for example.
 
I would like to see the line either raised or buried for the entire length of 12th ave to Union Cemetery. Buried would be my preference but I'm guessing the costs would be too high. If they can find a way to open up the Stampede grounds to 17th ave, it would help rejuvenate that part of 17th ave.
 
DougB said:
These concepts need to consider Victoria Park Station? If 17th Ave is to extend into the Stampede Grounds, that station will require reconfiguration (ex. moved to the north, elevated, buried). An elevated Erlton could face technical challenges transitioning to a buried Victoria Park, for example.
Click to expand...
They would have to do a pretty major overhaul of that area to make an elevated pedestrian/ vehicle connection worth their while including moving the Rotary House/Weadickvile area, moving the access ramps to the station ext.

I don't know how feasible it would be, but it does look like there is enough room for them to cut and cover the line parallel to the current line and the BMO center if they decide to demolish the Big Four building. I don't think there would be much technical issues so long as the Stampede is willing to give up land on the SW corner of the grounds. But of course there in lies the caveat to all this: to what extent would the Stampede be willing to inconvenience itself to bury the line? And that is not even looking at the cost.
 
Nimbus said:
The City has put out two options to help fix Macleod and 25th Street SW, no funding or real timeline at this point, perhaps taking as long as 20 years to come to fruition:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/25th-avenue-macleod-trail-1.4610604?cmp=rss

Personally I like option one.
Click to expand...
Definitely option 1. Option 2 is not very pedestrian friendly. It turns Macleod into a freeway feel rather than any chance at a decent corridor and the overpass cuts off everything between the station and Reader rock garden. Option 2 is awful IMO.
 
I prefer option 1. That corridor would be crazy with the anthem project on the west side and this on the east. Much needed though, I go through that intersection every day and it's brutal.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top