Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: Mill Creek restoration

  1. #1
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,277

    Default Mill Creek restoration

    Bring Mill Creek back to surface at river, council urged


    Mill Creek Ravine to fill with water, fish if river connection restored

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...rged-1.3009820

    Mill Creek could become a natural waterway again, if council follows through a suggestion to reunite the southside ravine with the North Saskatchewan River.

    The creek was redirected in the 1960s and now flows underground near Connors Road though a storm water pipe.

    Nancy Rempel, president of Keepers of the Mill Creek Ravine, asked council to restore the natural above-ground connection to the river.

    My hope is that by connecting the creek we will have more of a chance of creating an economically sound and stable area, she said.

    Rempel hopes that restoring the natural watershed environment will encourage whitefish and other animals to spawn in the area.

    This is a chance to reconnect it and, in theory, restore an ecological system, she said.

    She suggested doing the work while the Valley LRT Line is under construction, since crews will already be digging in the area.

    Im guessing on costs, that it would just make sense.

    LRT construction manager Wayne Mandryk said its too late to include the restoration of the ravine in the Valley Line construction without causing major delays to the project.

    He said the city had not studied the cost of Mill Creek proposal, but thinks it would be quite expensive.

    Its a fairly complicated effort in order to do that, he said. I would hate to try to make an estimate, but I think were talking six figures plus.

    Mandryk said LRT construction wont interfere with the possibility of restoring the creek in the future as a separate project.

    Councillors were intrigued by the idea and directed staff to look into whether or not it would be feasible.

    There is a big move to restore creek beds and waterways like this, Mayor Don Iveson said.

    I think its consistent with our approach to the river valley and biodiversity and doing the right thing for the environment.

    Coun. Michael Oshry, who made the motion, said hes not holding out much hope, but thinks the idea is still worth investigating.

    It could potentially be very expensive or not feasible at all, he said.

    City staff will report back the citys community services committee.
    You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea. - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  2. #2

    Default

    You might be able to get certain fish back...


  3. #3
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,412

    Default

    Yes. Put the money designated for the funicular and Rossdale Canal toward the restoration of Mill Creek.

  4. #4
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,412

    Default

    Attached is more information on Mill Creek stream bed restoration from blogger Andrew Leach:

    "Up until 1970, the Mill Creek flowed through the ravine as we know it today, under what is now Connors Road, between 98th Avenue and the current site of the Muttart Conservatory, and finally under 98th Avenue to empty into the North Saskatchewan River. You can still see the delta today just walk east of the Cloverdale footbridge, and the first wooden bridge you cross, shown below, crosses the abandoned creek bed.

    Edmonton faces a choice with the design and construction of the Valley Line LRT project either the project can be designed to include or accommodate a future re-animation of the legacy creek bed and delta which is a provincial priority according to the Environmental Assessment of the Valley Line or it can render even more permanent the decisions made in the 1960s and 1970s that transportation infrastructure trumps our natural environment."

    http://andrewleach.ca/uncategorized/...uldnt-pass-up/

  5. #5

    Default

    e said the city had not studied the cost of Mill Creek proposal, but thinks it would be quite expensive.

    Its a fairly complicated effort in order to do that, he said. I would hate to try to make an estimate, but I think were talking six figures plus.
    They don't know the costs but then states costs. Double speak

    6 figures is a lot in his mind? Comparatively speaking 6 figures builds about 10 meters of LRT line...
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  6. #6
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    4,973

    Default

    And low six figures could be obtained through various means, including fundraising.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  7. #7
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,277

    Default

    6 figures would be a reasonable cost. One look at the map and its apparent that extending the creek from the ravine to the original outflow near the Cloverdale footbridge will not be trivial. Taking LRT out of the equation, they would need to tunnel the new creek bed under Connors Hill Road, route through Muttart Conservatory land and then tunnel under 98 Ave.

    https://goo.gl/maps/Tp9IP
    https://goo.gl/maps/QFJYI
    You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea. - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  8. #8

    Default

    I agree that it would not be cheap and may not even be worthwhile to do.

    What bugs me iis these flipant comments that people at the COE make that are unsubstantiated and a WAG that become self forfilling prophecies and then take a life of their own. If they have not done a study, then keep your mouth shut on what the costs will be.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  9. #9
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    4,973

    Default

    So true, EPRT.

    Hah, maybe we can sell naming rights to the creek for a large company to pay for it. "Shaw Creek," anyone? (I'm kidding, kidding...)
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  10. #10
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gord Lacey View Post
    So true, EPRT.

    Hah, maybe we can sell naming rights to the creek for a large company to pay for it. "Shaw Creek," anyone? (I'm kidding, kidding...)
    Naaa wouldn't be Shaw Creek, Maybe Perrier Creek or Dasani Creek instead

    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  11. #11
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    1,375

    Default

    I was trying to track down a similar article from about a year ago, specifically about re-surfacing a portion of Mill Creek on the south end around Argyll Park, but I didn't have any luck. My biggest takeaway from the older article, was that as long as they keep blasting all the storm water from Mill Woods through the ravine, erosion is going to be a significant problem every time there is significant rain fall. While my knowledge as far as civil construction and potential solutions is zero, anyone who has been down there the last 5 years or so can attest that the banks are collapsing in rather quickly.

  12. #12

    Default

    Yes, the drainage pattern has massively changed over the past decades. I spent times in the ravine and watching water levels since the 1970's. Back in the 70's the drainage basin was mostly sloughs and farmland so after a storm the water rose slowly and took several days to return to normal. Now with all the parking lots, roads and roofs in Millwoods, when a storm hits, the water level can rise 8 feet in an hour and looks like a class 4 kayak course. Two hours later it is almost back to normal. The deluge is shockingly different and the stream erosion is much more severe than years ago. More damage can happen in one storm than a whole year of storms in the past.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  13. #13
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Aren't they improving Millwoods drainage, including adding/improving stormwater ponds, in the next few years?

  14. #14
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    I agree that it would not be cheap and may not even be worthwhile to do.

    What bugs me iis these flipant comments that people at the COE make that are unsubstantiated and a WAG that become self forfilling prophecies and then take a life of their own. If they have not done a study, then keep your mouth shut on what the costs will be.
    The context of his remarks, at least as I read it, makes it pretty clear that the STUDY of Mill Creek would be six figures. Not the actual work required. Which makes perfect sense to me. You'd need numerous reports from various consultants before you could even begin to design the new creek outflow and routing.

  15. #15
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,220

    Default

    I think it is a good idea to restore as much Mill Creek as possible, it would have been nice that the city would have considered this as part of the LRT project, but not only that a reconfiguration of the interchange ramps to sprawl less as well.

    It could be a great opportunity for Muttart to have an outside garden beside a restored Mill Creek, which would also make the walk from the LRT to Muttart more interesting it might even give a chance to add a 5th pyramid.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Yes. Put the money designated for the funicular and Rossdale Canal toward the restoration of Mill Creek.
    Haha really tho.

    I think this is a great idea. If feasible move ahead with it
    FREE THE LOOPING .GIF MEMES
    youtube.com/GrimEmpire

  17. #17
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,277

    Default

    Funding remains concern for resurrection of Mill Creek
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...reek-1.3312351

    A report, to be tabled at city hall during Tuesday's executive committee meeting, suggests that restoring the creek bed will be expensive. Project costs have previously been pegged at more than $10 million. Researching the best location for restoration is expected to cost $400,000.

    Administration expects that $3 million in provincial and federal funding will be made available for the restoration work, but funding isn't available for the feasibility study. The city will need to rely on outside grants and fundraising from community groups like the Keepers of Mill Creek to make the project happen.
    You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea. - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  18. #18

    Default

    This is half the cost of a funicular. This is a better use of money for river valley improvements IMHO.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    This is half the cost of a funicular. This is a better use of money for river valley improvements IMHO.
    I would agree, mind you I'm a fan of nature and green spaces both urban and rural. A surface level interconnect with the N. Saskatchewan would see some nice spawning fish move back in similar to Blackmud which is rather diverse.

  20. #20

    Default

    EDMONTON JOURNAL:

    Daylighting Mill Creek is technically feasible and would have major benefits for Edmonton’s fish population, according to a city review now out for public comment.The new plan would redirect Mill Creek to flow above ground between the new Valley Line LRT and Scona Road, near the Muttart Conservatory. The river outlet would have wetlands and small walking trails; upstream, the area the area could be naturalized or made more like a district park, with a small canoeing lake and cafe attached to the new LRT station.
    Either way, it would mean new spawning grounds for Edmonton’s pike and sucker populations, plus happy hunting for everything that eats them.
    “This project really enhances the North Saskatchewan River fishery. … It’s not just going to help things that are in the creek,” said biologist Lynn Maslen, a consultant on the project with Spencer Environmental.

    The bulrushes and wetlands will create prime pike habitat, white sucker will spawn further upstream, and the small fry that wash down into the river will feed a whole food chain, she said. Provincial officials have estimated it will could double the amount of spawning habitat in Edmonton.
    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...-creek-outfall

    More info here:
    https://www.edmonton.ca/city_governm...millcreekstudy

    The three concepts:
    https://www.edmonton.ca/city_governm...y_Concepts.pdf

    Although concept 3 is nice, seems to be the most expensive, and would probably make a bigger mess of the roadways through there.
    Concept 2 probably cheapest and gets the job done.
    I personally think concept 1 is a good compromise.

    As an aside, i think it's rich that they'd propose a small recreational lake in concept 3, but cut it from blatchford. Like someone would take their canoe down to that tiny lake bound by 2 quasi-freeways to really enjoy their day.
    Last edited by Perspective; 08-01-2017 at 03:21 PM.

  21. #21
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,407

    Default

    I think LRT access from Connors Road is important. Option 2 is probably the best.

    Also, with the LRT stopping at Muttart, is it necessary to keep that transit stop north of the overpass?
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  22. #22

    Default

    Love the plan, but really, a 3-stroke canoe pond there? Can you bring your canoe on the LRT? Stupid. If the city wants a canoe lake, do it at Beaumaris and Hawrelak. This city is so f'ing stupid sometimes.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  23. #23
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,189

    Default

    Love the plan as well, but it all comes down to $$$ and opportunity cost here right now.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  24. #24
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,627

    Default

    Does this concept mesh/interfere with the Edmonton ski club expansion concept? I'd say the ski club plan has a bigger bang for the buck in terms of city money and impact on the city.

  25. #25
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    44,189

    Default

    No direct impact, whereas the LRT yes. This could compliment the ESC for the summer months if they did a mountain bike course/trials etc.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  26. #26

    Default

    Three options, but what they really are is:

    Three roadway options with more or less cost, and more or less contiguous open space and more or less highspeed/free flow.
    Which are tied in the given options to 3 different trail networks and 3 different park space plans even though there's nothing about the three aspects that makes one road option fit with a particular trail option or park option.

    The costs are almost completely in the road category. Option 2 is surely cheaper but the least improvement. The other options will cost more but result in more usable park space, and will slow traffic speeds somewhat, reducing noise.

    Other than that, a paved trail following the creek, with easy grades, will be a massive improvement over the steep climb and cratered path that exist now.
    There can only be one.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •