(09-29-2016, 12:32 PM)Canard Wrote:(09-29-2016, 12:13 PM)urbd Wrote: Is it just me or is anyone else not pleased with the amount of new grass strips being added to the streetscape? I was expecting an extra wide sidewalk (or any hardscape really, i thought they would use the black concrete 'brick' thing they've used in other parts) close to King/Victoria, along Victoria... but that whole stretch is now lined with sod - odd choice for what is expected to be the densest urban hub in the Region.
I guess you can't please everyone, but - you're kidding, right?I think it looks absolutely glorious and I welcome any and all green that can be added to the urban landscape. Francis between King and Duke, and all of Borden look a kajillion times better than they used to.
As I said, I like the way it looks. But in an urban environment, grass actually affects mobility and pedestrian movement. Grass is more difficult to walk on (wheelchairs, strollers, etc.) than on a smooth hard surface. Has anyone here ever heard of bioswales? There are lots of examples where you can keep a great pedestrian environment with actually useful landscape infrastructure. Grass just needs regular maintenance, water, etc. What I mean is that yes, having green is great, but in an urban environment it is better to have it either in defined planting beds, or bioswales that actually have a function, or planters. Not as grass.
The sidewalk along Victoria, from Joseph to Charles feels extremely narrow now with all that grass: two people barely fit side by side.
A couple examples of better defined greenery:
![[Image: swale8.jpg]](https://muralmouth.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/swale8.jpg)
![[Image: a44abd40e5d3cc3663d0d3a592b07ffe.jpg]](https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/a4/4a/bd/a44abd40e5d3cc3663d0d3a592b07ffe.jpg)
![[Image: 1a91ccf60fdf8f7f_1626-w400-h534-b0-p0--home-design.jpg]](http://st.hzcdn.com/fimgs/1a91ccf60fdf8f7f_1626-w400-h534-b0-p0--home-design.jpg)