Discussions

daisychain said "there are train crossings along with pedestrian crossing all over the city. Pedestrians stop when the arms come down on 1st street. Am I missing something, why do we need a pedestrian bridge? "

we need a pedestrian bridge due to the arrogant stance of C P rail , they run many less trains than they used to but still do not want pedestrians crossing at ground level as they have since the tracks were put in ( at the expense of the people of canada) . i wonder how many accidents have occured over the years ? over the last 68 years i have walked across many times without incident as have many others.

The reason that CP doesn't allow pedestrians is because there are too many sets of tracks being it's still part of the yards.  
 
To the person posting that says it would be better to build a vehicle bridge...  
 
NO!! A vehicle bridge would cost somewhere north of $30,000,000.00: a number of us spoke out against that for a long time.  
 
Before the city goes and spends millions on a bridge, perhaps they should look at the yearly cost of providing the residents of the affected area with free bus passes for 25 years, or alternatively making the Assiniboine bus a free route.

Free bus passes for anyone living between 1st and 18th north of the track but south of the river. The bus already runs down there anyway. Adjust frequency as necessary. Bus out of north end goes directly to buss mall on 8th street. If the northenders want to go somewhere else they can pay for a transfer while there. The complaint is that they cant conveniently get to appointments etc downtown. Other than some adjustment to frequency of busses there should be very little added cost to the city. Yes I know more fuel, and maybe some wages, but for the most part employees and busses are already being used on a daily basis. Now take the cost for this white elephant, security risk bridge and budget that amount to offset any added cost this plan would incur. Keep in mind the free bus passes would cost zero dollars. I estimate on the VERY high end this program could run for minimum 25 years on 8-10 million dollars. Anybody that lives down there gets a pass. I don’t care if it’s a homeless person, handicapped, or otherwise.  
 
Then monitor ridership for say 1 year then make tweeks.

Instead of making a useless footbridge why don’t they use the money to provide more transit buses and routes seems like this would be a better use of the money. And get rid of the double pay system currently in place and just transfer so that people can afford to take the bus everyday if needed.

When you consider the fact that this area was first ostracized and neglected by this city and deprived of infrastructure for so many years because it contained residences of Ukrainian immigrants, one would think that be idea of making improvements to the area finally might have some appreciation. While some might abuse the property underneath the bridge, that's no reason to deny appropriate access to the residents north of the tracks and south of the river. And by the way, I haven't heard anyone putting out any compassion for the lost souls who are stuck in a horrific transient life. Shame on you who disparage these unfortunates.

Donnel said "Instead of making a useless footbridge why don’t they use the money to provide more transit buses and routes seems like this would be a better use of the money. And get rid of the double pay system currently in place and just transfer so that people can afford to take the bus everyday if needed. "

a lot cheaper to provide the required bus passes, than the $$$ required to build a multi-million dollar "foot bridge"... like seriously??? Even if it is for the barrier free, wheel chair public!! This must be a feather for some city personnel's cap?????

Provox said "When you consider the fact that this area was first ostracized and neglected by this city and deprived of infrastructure for so many years because it contained residences of Ukrainian immigrants, one would think that be idea of making improvements to the area finally might have some appreciation. While some might abuse the property underneath the bridge, that's no reason to deny appropriate access to the residents north of the tracks and south of the river. And by the way, I haven't heard anyone putting out any compassion for the lost souls who are stuck in a horrific transient life. Shame on you who disparage these unfortunates. "

can we be sure that the bridge as proposed will be an improvement for the area ? some of us are concerned that it will be a magnet for trouble as was the old one when vehicles were banned .

That area is low income so not everyone has a vehicle which means access to downtown or even superstore where most shopped before the bridge was torn down is very difficult. Also do you think it’s right that the property taxes they pay don’t get reduced without the bridge now that their property value has been reduced because of less access to the rest of the city? I for one would be asking to pay less in property taxes without a bridge!

Kristofer said "That area is low income so not everyone has a vehicle which means access to downtown or even superstore where most shopped before the bridge was torn down is very difficult. Also do you think it’s right that the property taxes they pay don’t get reduced without the bridge now that their property value has been reduced because of less access to the rest of the city? I for one would be asking to pay less in property taxes without a bridge! "

I for one am not convinced that the property values in that area will be down long term.  
 
Frankly, I expect property values to be HIGHER in the long term because downtown crime can no longer "spill over" into the area. I can see more people buying in that area WITHOUT a bridge.