David A
Senior Member
Yes, same old, same old. The city generally remains impervious to input and feedback. It used to be better, but now it is so hard to get through to these people.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
Stevey_G
Active Member
Clueless, none of those things create ambient white noise to drown out city noise and sirens. The result is a less inviting park with no place to gather. Also that feature is not large enough to become a maintenance nightmare. I used to own a landscaping company and we designed/build comparable features when I was in University. seasonal operational and maintenance costs would be minimal and the capital costs should not tally beyond 30k and that's considering it's a government project.
She's right, it'll be a good park, but they literally forced people to sell their land on questionable expropriation grounds to give themselves an opportunity to create a landmark destination. Why are they essentially settling for what will rival a suburban school yard feat. LED strip?
edit: limited space for mechanical systems? Does she mean the underground vault that will house the pump and suction/discharge/overflow lines and electrical? Because for a little fountain of this size that should be insignificant. Unless of course, someone forgot to put a 1-call in and realized there are utilities running through this area. Imagine planning and designing and not doing a onecall first...one would hope that's not the case.
Last edited:
Out of Towner
Active Member
Wouldn't be much of a surprise if Sarah Stephenson and her Warehouse Park team weren't bullied into removing a water feature in the park by some administrative fossils in the parks maintenance department who didn't want some extra work on their plate. I'd bet that there wasn't one fossil that stood up and said that they could get it done for today's Edmontonians and for those well into the future. Too bad for Sarah that the pared back park is going to be laid at her feet because the maintenance fossils have their excuse if development around the park doesn't materialize. The poorly designed pavilion didn't meet everybody's needs is what the fossils will say and there is some truth to that. The pavilion isn't even built and it's already a point of contention. For Sarah's and her team's sake let's hope that the pared back park will be enough to attract investment into the area because I'd expect that Maclab is already saying ..."hey I though you said that there was going to be a water feature."
Gronk!
Senior Member
Here's a brilliant idea:
Build the Warehouse as-is without the fountain. Once the parking lot west of BP is finally owned by the City (and not owned by some arsehole in California) then transform the parking lot into an extension of Warehouse Park c/w a big-ass fountain.
Build the Warehouse as-is without the fountain. Once the parking lot west of BP is finally owned by the City (and not owned by some arsehole in California) then transform the parking lot into an extension of Warehouse Park c/w a big-ass fountain.
Out of Towner
Active Member
It is a brilliant idea provided that the City doesn't pull another bait and switch. Think that Maclab was consulted about down grading the park?
Avenuer
Senior Member
This is why Giovanni Caboto Park is my favorite in the City - it has a sweet fountain (honestly). I can count on maybe one hand the number of City parks with fountains or water features that are not splash pads / spray parks:
Giovanni Caboto
Paul Kane
Alexander Circle (if we are calling it a park)
City Hall Plaza?
...what am I missing?
Giovanni Caboto
Paul Kane
Alexander Circle (if we are calling it a park)
City Hall Plaza?
...what am I missing?
TAS
Senior Member
Alexander Circle Park in Glenora.
Stevey_G
Active Member
It'll certainly be severely underutilized due to lack of staying amenities. I'm sure people will jog the trails and people will use the hoops. I feel like the playground will be quite cheap and everything else will feel like an underwhelming grass-space. A great stamp on the downtown core of why Edmonton's leadership and bureacracy doesn't have it in itself to become a city of landmarks and will always be just a gateway city.
northlands
Senior Member
MacLac
Senior Member
Couldn't they get in Epcor to move that teeny, tiny single power line and associated power poles to make this operation go smoother?
Glenco
Senior Member
Have you ever tried to deal with Epcor?
Barnaby
Active Member
That line is a telecom connection. It's possible that Telus will be installing new infrastructure to bury the line or reroute it.
David A
Senior Member
I think the poles in the pictures are gone now. EPCOR while city owned is a separate entity, which has its own schedule and priories so it may take a while to coordinate. Telus is totally separate, so that may even be harder.
Things do get done, but it would be nice if they were more coordinated as this probably slows down progress and increases costs.
Things do get done, but it would be nice if they were more coordinated as this probably slows down progress and increases costs.
Edmonton
New Member
Habibfazil
Active Member
Quite the start on the park, keep it up will ya?