CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
There already is the London development which is kind of TOD. It just is not marketed or viewed that way.
627 Heritage Dr SW | 23m | 6s | Good Form | Metafor
- Thread starter MichaelS
- Start date
CallmeCatbread
Active Member
We should build whatever makes sense to build. Can't artificially limit building height near transit stations based on vibes.
TooBizzy
New Member
Yeah let people write policy with their feet and pockets. If there's enough demand to fill up high rise clusters around every train station in Calgary... then maybe we should build more train stations.
pdubs015
New Member
This is perfect for the area. I think more appropriate high density TOD sites on the south line are Chinook and Anderson.
It’s sad to see us lose the YMCA and not have another rec centre replace it in the nearby area.
It’s sad to see us lose the YMCA and not have another rec centre replace it in the nearby area.
RolleyMakr_168
New Member
I'd argue that Erlton/Stampede also has some potential- especially with those two giant empty lots on the west side of Macleod (I'm genuinely sick of seeing those still around lol). It's also close to Greater Downtown- which helps.
As for the rest of the South Line- Southland, Fish Creek/Lacombe and 39th Avenue may also have some potential- nowhere near Anderson and Chinook, but still a bit with some infills. 39th in particular would be ideal for low-rise and mid-rise mixed use TOD projects along Macleod or in the vicinity.
It's nice to see some mixed-use going up at Shawnessy.
Can't really think of much for Somerset-Bridlewood at the moment. And I don't see much of anything for Canyon Meadows.
39th definitely needs improved pedestrian access. You can only get to 42nd from the southbound platform, which means that if you're heading south on the train you need to walk north to the crossing, cross over, and walk the length of the platform south.
Some people try to cut through the parking lot to Macleod to walk south, but that's a shitty walk over "landscaping" and random concrete, only to end up at the back of a hotel or pawn shop.
I think, bare minimum, there should be pedestrian walkways from both platforms directly to 42nd Ave, and there should be a crosswalk or light at Burnsland Rd and 39th Ave, where the tracks meet 39th. A sidewalk on the north side of 39th Ave the full length of the block to Manchester Rd would be nice, too - there are things to walk to along Manchester Rd: Uncommon Cider, Taiko Canteen, and of course the impound lot!
Some people try to cut through the parking lot to Macleod to walk south, but that's a shitty walk over "landscaping" and random concrete, only to end up at the back of a hotel or pawn shop.
I think, bare minimum, there should be pedestrian walkways from both platforms directly to 42nd Ave, and there should be a crosswalk or light at Burnsland Rd and 39th Ave, where the tracks meet 39th. A sidewalk on the north side of 39th Ave the full length of the block to Manchester Rd would be nice, too - there are things to walk to along Manchester Rd: Uncommon Cider, Taiko Canteen, and of course the impound lot!
RolleyMakr_168
New Member
I used to work in that area- so yeah, I get what you mean
pdubs015
New Member
In my opinion, the city should focus its efforts on going all in on a few key TODs that make sense over the next 10 years, then fully build them out. After this, move onto the next most obvious TODs after full completion of the first set. It will become obvious what the second set becomes as the city grows and evolves.
To me, the best TODs for the first batch are: Westbrook, Anderson, Chinook.
The city should upgrade infrastructure into ‘main streets’ before the development comes, change the zoning for the parcels now, and offer development incentives for the 500m radius. In my view, cheap financing or temporary tax subsidies are the best way to achieve this. Further, they should even consider penalizing under zoned parcels that should be scaled up. They could give these parcels higher tax rates for example.
To me, the best TODs for the first batch are: Westbrook, Anderson, Chinook.
The city should upgrade infrastructure into ‘main streets’ before the development comes, change the zoning for the parcels now, and offer development incentives for the 500m radius. In my view, cheap financing or temporary tax subsidies are the best way to achieve this. Further, they should even consider penalizing under zoned parcels that should be scaled up. They could give these parcels higher tax rates for example.
Beltline_B
Senior Member
You can artificially limit heights to certain areas based on vibes, and trains stations aren’t necessarily different. I get wanting to leverage areas around stations by building higher, but I’d rather see 3 or 4 stations become high rise nodes, and the rest become low to mid rise nodes.
Not everyone who wants to live near a station wants to live in a forest of high rises.
CallmeCatbread
Active Member
No, you can't. Nothing good comes out of micromanaging the built environment like that. Limiting height near train stations just limits the number of people who get to live near train stations which is the exact opposite of what we want, particularly when there are so few options already.
If you can't handle being near tall buildings but also want to live near a train station go live in Tuscany or something. Can't imagine they'll be getting towers any time soon.
It's a moot point anyway because as we see with heritage, the market is happy to build mid rises near a train station, even if I'm sure they would be allowed to build towers here if they really wanted to
BKha
Active Member
We already do that, that’s what zoning is. It’s not perfect, but it’s still needed.
High rises around some of the stations is fine, but I also would like areas that are smaller buildings. My favorite LRT station area by far is Sunnyide, I’d like to see more stations with that kind of vibe.