[thommyjo]

Let’s hope for some strong rain storms soon once planting is done! Toasty week for planting.

 

[kcantor]

Yes, but I have seen nearly out of control fires started by "urban campers" in the winter evening earlier this year less than a block from where this park will be.

So it is grim, but based on experience.

Maybe so but I highly doubt these will have any lessening impact on dumpster fires or other urban camper fires. And if by chance they do, aren’t those fires better and not worse in a properly designed and maintained and highly visible location, all of which are a detriment to potentially associated detrimental activities?

 

[TAS]

Fitness area on southwest corner.

 

[David A]

Maybe so but I highly doubt these will have any lessening impact on dumpster fires or other urban camper fires. And if by chance they do, aren’t those fires better and not worse in a properly designed and maintained and highly visible location, all of which are a detriment to potentially associated detrimental activities?

I agree with your first point. Regardless, I do feel the crowd that may be attracted to the park for these reasons will lead to more wear and tear or maintenance issues.

They may also become a deterrent for other people to use or enjoy the park. So the combination of fires and open access late at night will not be a good one.

 

[TAS]

I like the addition of the swings on the light feature in this render - if it stays.

 

[Out of Towner]

As for my own view on fire pits, I have neighbours that make use of both wood and gas-fired pits and my experience is that there ate much bigger issues to get concerned about. They are the foundation for many social activities year round that might not otherwise take place or would be forced indoors. I don’t know for a fact whether these are going to be wood or gas-fired but do know the City used to provide firewood for picnic sites with barbecue grills and still does for those sites that take reservations. For providing added protection from non native pests or inappropriate materials being burned it’s a reasonable policy. There are many places and many activities for which the city provides garbage removal and cleanup. As for the cost of firewood if these aren’t gas-fired, I believe their own forestry activities are likely to provide a low cost avenue to securing it.

The screenshot posted by danimori (thank-you) appears to be from a set of working drawings so it's unlikely that there would be an addendum from anybody changing the fire pits at this stage of development. The question of how the fire pits became part of the project remains a mystery though. I don't believe that fire pits were ever part of the public consultation process. The public was asked for input on its choice of the style of park, and all the preliminary options presented to the public included a water feature. Fire pits were never put forward as an option - but there they are. How did that happen? A posting member from this site who attended some park planning meeting on behalf of the Wihkwentowin community reported that a water feature was rejected by city representatives because it exceeded Warehouse Park's budget. Circulating water in a water feature costs less than continuously burning natural gas though. So where is the transparency on how a water feature was rejected and fire pits become part of the project?

Moreover, what's happening to the City of Edmonton's plan to be carbon neutral by 2040? Why is the City of Edmonton ignoring its principals and its commitment to fighting climate change. The overall issue isn't the amount of carbon that will be generated by burning natural gas in the fire pits - instead it's that the City of Edmonton should follow the standard that it sets for its citizens. There's no point in having a carbon neutral mandate just for the sake of having one.

 

[johnnyboy]

This horse appears appropriately flogged.

 

[Out of Towner]

This horse appears appropriately flogged.

Some transparency and an explanation from city officials into their decision would be nice but that's never going to happen because they don't know what they're doing anyways. Constance had it right from the start. Let everybody do whatever and whenever they want. I'm out.

 

[archited]

The City is inching closer to a functional park (it is still miles away).

 

[Gronk!]

 

[David A]

Some transparency and an explanation from city officials into their decision would be nice but that's never going to happen because they don't know what they're doing anyways. Constance had it right from the start. Let everybody do whatever and whenever they want. I'm out.

I feel public consultation has become a check a box exercise which unfortunately is taken very seriously. People don't feel listened to you the city, which is one reason there is so much frustration now.

It also doesn't help that the decision making process is not transparent, they randomly do things that were not expected or discussed.

 

[Out of Towner]

Visit the City of Edmonton's picnic site website and one will notice that city parks are a cottage industry that requires administration. Warehouse Park will add to the city's inventory of rentable space. Does a fountain create user fees? No. Do fire pits generate revenue and expand bureaucracy? They do at other city parks. No explanation whatsoever from the administration whether the water feature was cut because of Warehouse Park's capital budget or the Park's Department operating budget. Certainly its poor communication and perhaps even poor leadership.

 

[David A]

Visit the City of Edmonton's picnic site website and one will notice that city parks are a cottage industry that requires administration. Warehouse Park will add to the city's inventory of rentable space. Does a fountain create user fees? No. Do fire pits generate revenue and expand bureaucracy? They do at other city parks. No explanation whatsoever from the administration whether the water feature was cut because of Warehouse Park's capital budget or the Park's Department operating budget. Certainly its poor communication and perhaps even poor leadership.

I really don't see a revenue windfall from fire pits. At best the fees will cover the additional costs of maintaining and cleaning them up. Unfortunately, I feel it may be presented differently by the bureaucracy to the gullible above them.

 

[Out of Towner]

$30 - $40 hr depending on. Not a huge money maker after expenses. Lucky to break even as mentioned but at least there are some additions to job descriptions which are beneficial to the union and that probably had something to do with the Parks Department's input into the decision making process.

 

[IanO]