News   Apr 03, 2020
From the Editor: A Message to Our Readers
 8.3K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Topping Off March 2020: What's Hot on SkyriseEdmonton
 9.5K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
News Roundup for April 2, 2020
 3.1K     0 

Misc. Parks and Greenspace Projects

https://www.facebook.com/cityofedmonton/posts/10159542578929371

From the project page:

Design Adjustments​

During engagement, respondents expressed concerns around preserving the environment and maintaining the wildlife corridor. To address these concerns and others raised during engagement, the following changes are being made to the design:
  • Fencing will be removed in one section of the trail to widen the wildlife corridor. The fencing was initially installed during the last realignment to protect a newly naturalized area near the trail.
  • In three locations the fenceline will be moved southward, which will widen the wildlife corridor.
  • In another section, raised fencing will be installed to allow for smaller wildlife access to the river valley corridor.
  • Drainage concerns will be addressed during construction to ensure low spots drain properly.
  • Garbage cans will be provided at both ends of the trail.
 
Awesome!

New Boyle Street Neighbourhood Playground
Grand opening scheduled for the spring of 2022.
BY ANITA JENKINS
boyle_street_playground_900_534_90.jpg

bmcnews.org

New Boyle Street Neighbourhood Playground

A new playground at Boyle Street Plaza will incorporate Indigenous teachings.
bmcnews.org
 
CplKlinger said:
Edmonton is looking for feedback on its "Ribbon of Green" land management plan. The survey closes on February 14.
Click to expand...

It's disappointing that this is turning into a battle between conservationists and groups with a recreation focus. I am participating but not placing a lot of faith in the process. It does seem that even when there is consultation the decision and plan going forward will be decided and spelled out in private. The language used in the vision declarations for each area is divisive and short sighted, not taking into account future developments, densification and the necessity to provide access to more people as the city grows.

I understand that I am very biased as I mountain bike in the river valley three to four times per week and it would be very hard to change the mindset of people that see mountain bikes as ecological monsters, I just wish that decision makers would look at places around the world where mountain biking is recognized as a prime activity and cities are incorporating that in their land use strategies. At the moment conservationist are getting a lot of traction discrediting mountain biking and taking away access, it would be naïve not think that many of these land access rulings are driven by NIMBYism.
 
I participated the other day and could not agree more with your observations.

-Maintain/protect areas that are natural
-Restore areas that were identified as critical to biodiversity, corridor and the flora/fauna
-Support the respectful and diverse use of areas throughout
-Identify and craft specific areas to share history, interpretive/storytelling
-Enhance overall use by efficiently and effectively using developed areas by providing w/c, protection from weather, improving accessibilty
-Compliment uses by providing small to medium-scale options for food/bev - be it seasonal (food trucks/fruit stands) or year round such as Rossdale Power plant/pump houses, Rafter's Landing/LMP, Hawrelak, etc.
 
^as someone who also spends a lot of time on the Valley trails, i too find it really frustrating. a 12'-18' dirt singletrack, well constructed (ie by emba or an educated trailbuilder) is waaayyyy less destructive or damaging than the gravel and paved paths they put in throughout the valley as land turns to parks (ie the Jan Reimer area, terwillegar), never mind the giant paved swathes that comprise the 'touch the water' plans. It feels almost hypocritical, or at the very least ignorant, to label singletrack as destructive when the city builds other park facilities so intensively.
Also, what exactly is the plan to prevent trail use? they're gonna be built and used anyways. most of the track in the valley was originally built illegally, and while not ideal, that is going to continue to happen, unabated, until the city gets off it's high horse and engages with the MTB community meaningfully to build and maintain track that is ecologically sound. They can't stop the singletrack, all they can do is make it more dangerous, clandestine, and destructive. This attitude is super frustrating.
 
Gronk! said:
edmontonjournal.com

Opinion: It's time to turn Edmonton's river valley golf courses into public parks

The news that Hawrelak Park will be closed for a minimum of three years raises concerns and begs the question of how green space is allocated in a growing and moder…
edmontonjournal.com edmontonjournal.com
Click to expand...

Mayfair and Highlands are not public and not cheap compared to city courses.
Many Oliver residents also have really good access to Ezio Faraone Park, as well as leg grounds. People also use the green space at Oilver school and the park by Oliver pool.
I actually like smaller parks better - less cars.

That said I would not be opposed to looking at repurposing Victoria Golf course back to parkland.
It's used in winter for skating, cross country skiing and walking. And in that case, I guess golfers can argue it is available for multi uses during a good portion of the year.

Certainly, some cities in Canada are looking at this very issue, although in various cases adding needed residential space (such as in Vancouver area) is part of the rationale.

 
I feel like we already have an abundance of parkland in the river valley. In my opinion additional parkland would only have a small marginal benefit. However, I'd probably be on board with the city selling Victoria and Riverside as they aren't particularly nice golf courses. I'd like to see some residential/commercial/tourist development go up in its place (along with small amounts of parkland).
 
I would shutdown the Victoria Golf Course and convert it to park space c/w fountains, benches and planters (shut up, archited 😝 ), picnic areas, bike paths, washrooms and an off-leash dog park - essentially the same things we've been proposing for the upcoming Warehouse District Park. I would keep both the Greenhouse restaurant and the cricket pitch open along with the road to both.
 
Gronk! said:
I would shutdown the Victoria Golf Course and convert it to park space c/w fountains, benches and planters (shut up, archited 😝 ), picnic areas, bike paths, washrooms and an off-leash dog park - essentially the same things we've been proposing for the upcoming Warehouse District Park. I would keep both the Greenhouse restaurant and the cricket pitch open along with the road to both.
Click to expand...
That works for me. I would also like to see the Mayfair given notice the lease will not be renewed. These guys can afford to buy some land outside of the city centre. The City riverbank lands should be for the use of ALL of the people.
 
Gronk! said:
I would shutdown the Victoria Golf Course and convert it to park space c/w fountains, benches and planters (shut up, archited 😝 ), picnic areas, bike paths, washrooms and an off-leash dog park - essentially the same things we've been proposing for the upcoming Warehouse District Park. I would keep both the Greenhouse restaurant and the cricket pitch open along with the road to both.
Click to expand...
Victoria can serve Oliver, warehouse park and leg serve DT. Louis Mckinney for quarters and Riverdale. Kinsman for Strathcona. Hawrelak/Buena Vista/wilfed for uni and west side.

Thatd be my dream^^

Id love to see usage numbers on Victoria golf course as well! I think the decisions should be as simple as whatever would get more use is what that city land should be used for. Anyone have thoughts on if thats the wrong criteria?

Golf courses are a way of privatizing public lands and limiting access to people, especially marginalized groups or lower income residents.

As density grows in Oliver, the demand for space will be huge. Paul kane is arguably full in the summer. Hard to find space for seating and groups there on nice days.
 
^ love this. the golf courses in the central part of the valley are a waste of space, especially victoria. In summer when the course is open, there is not a lot of green space actually available to the public in the area, the course swallows up most of it.
I would really like to see usage numbers, as well as a full budget of how much money the city spend on these course all-in, not just for certain parts of operation. For what these courses charge per-person, they ought not to be subsidized a dime, as they are still unattainably expensive for a lot of people. If public funds are going to be used to subsidize recreation, it needs to be in a way that ensures the entire public can afford that activity/facility. At $30-40 a person for 9 holes, golfing at Victoria can only be a veeeerrrry occasional activity for a lot of people. If that's the case, why bother having city funds involved at all?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top