[Daveography]

We need to be mindful that this is one of the primary entranceways into our Downtown... and it is confusing and congested as is.

Confusing how?

Congestion is part of living in a city. You yourself have been quoted as saying we need more congestion, in the context that it encourages more walking, cycling, transit, more density, more local businesses, etc. etc. etc.

Being a primary entrance to downtown for cars isn't a good reason to constrain the environment for everyone else anymore. That's the entire point of so much of what Council and Administration have been working towards for the better part of a decade.

 

[David A]

As someone who lives not too far away from here, I find much of Gateway to be a bit bleak, perhaps because of much of the area near the rail line has not been developed. You get to the Whyte Ave area, yes it is a nice lively area, but blink and you go through it along Gateway in a few blocks. It would be nice to extend the Whyte Ave vibe a bit further south on Gateway. It is a nice area, but a lot is just concentrated along Whyte Ave itself. We should take more advantage of some of these prime spaces we have and fill them up.

 

[Clearshades]

I don't know how old you are but I started exploring Whyte since I was 14. The corridor south if 104st was not even activated including the train terminal during my early 20s (in the 90s). After mid 90s, it saw progressive movement.

 

[Macroman520]

We need to be mindful that this is one of the primary entranceways into our Downtown... and it is confusing and congested as is.

I don't really see how it's a primary entranceway into downtown. It's certainly a way, but it just kind of... stops at Saskatchewan Drive without connecting directly to either of the approach roads for the Walterdale Bridge. The main thing I see it doing is generating unnecessary through-traffic for Whyte Avenue (or leading to an incredibly sharp, hairpin turn from Saskatchewan Drive to Queen Elizabeth Park Road), which is already fairly congested as it is. There's no real reason or benefit I can see to having it treated as a primary roadway north of 63 Street. Traffic should be redirected to 109/99 Streets instead, which align with the bridges leading into downtown.

 

[IanO]

It is a primary routing from anyone coming from Red Deer south.

 

[Macroman520]

That's true, but it doesn't seem to be the best, or even a good one.

 

[IanO]

Why not? Direct until north of Whyte, you can pop into Whyte for some lunch of dinner and then carryon. It provides you with two options to Downtown from Sask depending on where you are going and is scenic.

 

[Macroman520]

It's certainly direct (but again, not to downtown), and is scenic to an extent (once you are past all of the industrial to the immediate south). All of that is correct, but those benefits exist (mostly) with 109/99 as well. Neither of those are too far from the good parts of Whyte Avenue, and are more conveniently placed for travel into downtown than Gateway Blvd. The current arrangement certainly has benefits, as you pointed out, but not overwhelmingly so. I don't think any significant benefits would be lost if Gateway Boulevard was no longer an arterial. My main problem is that what we have now is (in my opinion) keeping Gateway Boulevard from developing in the same way as the rest of the area (for reasons which have been pointed out by others), and I don't think the interests of Whyte Avenue are exactly best served by directing significant traffic volumes right through the most attractive portion of it.

 

[itom987]

Don't let them collect dust.

 

[ryspot]

I think the most important improvement to traffic at Gateway and Whyte will be building a continuous 76 Ave. Turning on/off Whyte is a hazard when there are so many pedestrians crossing in both directions. If traffic could turn onto 76th, that would help protect pedestrians. Gateway and Whyte should be a scramble crossing, but traffic would back up even more during rush hour. I'm really excited for this development based on the quality of Beljan and the other container markets I've seen in other cities.

 

[CplKlinger]

We just need to wait for CPR to sell off the Irvine Yard and then 76th could be punched through to 99 Street. That closure would also create some massive, valuable development parcels.

Does CP have any medium-long term plans to sell it off?

 

[Guy 1]

Does CP have any medium-long term plans to sell it off?

CP had partnered with DREAM to develop that land (along with a bunch of other CP land) a while back. No idea what the status on that partnership or the irvine yard is at this point

 

[northlands]

I would love to know how Dream got themselves in bed with CP Rail for that. Excuse the pun but that's an opportunity most developers only dream of. Especially the ones with any sort of imagination.

 

[quit]

I would love to know how Dream got themselves in bed with CP Rail for that. Excuse the pun but that's an opportunity most developers only dream of. Especially the ones with any sort of imagination.

Who knows. They aren't Brookfield, but they do have a good presence here and they aren't that small. They still have $15b in assets under management and a 2b market cap pre covid.

 

[chrisvazquez7]

CP isn’t going anywhere. They have serious capacity constraints in the Edmonton region as it is. And there are still active customers in the yard. There are rumours they might actually put tracks back in.