badc0ffee
Active Member
I think the child in the render may be confused about where she is.
|
|
|
Calgary I Marda 33 I ?m I 2s I Ronmor I Abugov Kaspar
- Thread starter MichaelS
- Start date
This is just perfect for the location. Patio facing onto 33rd, and a secondary patio above which may even get some downtown views.
shermanator
New Member
Central Taps, nice. Don't know how well that lower North facing patio will do but I will for sure check out the upper patio.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Totally agree. Everything else about the location and proposal is fine to me.
I find it hard to believe that using 25% of a parcel with existing lane access to allow for casual vehicle circulation (that is duplicative to adjacent lane access literally 1m away) is good planning. On a Main Street that is championing pedestrian walkablity none the less.
Take away the duplicative lane and all problems are solved. Plus the business can widen their revenue-generating part of the project that is the entire point (I.e. the building).
If I was a planner on this file I’d die on the hill on this one - not because it’s particularly important, but because the absurdity of creating double lane access points adjacent to each other, on a laned parcel - that arguably needs zero connections to the redeveloping Main Street, not two.
If there’s a point to planning, this is it. Prevent dumb duplicative accesses that contradict the design outcomes of a nice Main Street.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
NO! I'm trying to save money. A rooftop patio means I'll have to sell my car.
Last edited:
rkarsk
New Member
Excited to see them coming to Marda Loop, but won't the street-facing patio essentially be in perma-shade most of the year aside from a bit of sun in the morning? The rooftop patio would be better, but not by a ton.
It's hard to say how much shade it will get. This pic on Google Streetview shows the would be patio area getting late afternoon sun during the summer, but the new building will be closer to the street. My gut feeling is during the summer it will get more sun than we expect.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Wouldn't the issue with the driveway be that the existing driveway is on the property of the adjacent building; I'm assuming the adjacent building's owners wouldn't love people and garbage trucks accessing Central's property using their driveway which they pay to maintain.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
The original sin was that there was no alley that cuts through the whole block for whatever reason (go back a few pages in this thread to see previous discussions).
Rather than do anything about that, what we have done instead is allow everyone to have their own direct accesses across the main street sidewalk. We can't have a garbage truck reverse down the existing alley stub or do a three-point turn because of reasons (even though this happens all the time everywhere), we also can't just have the property serviced by a smaller garbage truck for some reason, we also can't load and unload from the street like most cities in the world for some reason, and we also can't have two neighbouring parcels share a single, existing ramp access for further reasons. The result is a compromised main street that will underperform and be unattractive forever - all to create a block with duplicative, redundant garbage truck circulations.
Many ways to solve this problem that doesn't compromise the main street and the street frontage. We just can't seem to do them yet - hopefully further design iterations will change that.
In this case the benefits are also super clear too - more development potential, better walking and pedestrian environment on a key main street with huge public and private investment occurring. It should be in everyone's best interest to solve this one.
Last edited:
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Oddly, this section of 33rd really suffers from this. Even on the northside of the road, where there is an alley, there is no street frontage of much else but parking lots.
As far back as the aerial images go for this site (1953), there is no alley on that block. I wonder why?
By 1995 there is an alley at either end of the block and a lot of the car centric street facing, sidewalk crossing parking. The reason there is not an alley all the way through actually seems to be the adjacent property (2031) to this property that is being redeveloped (2015) cutting off what could've been an alley for parking. Granted it could also be 2020 and 2022 on 34th Ave that block the alley.
I believe, over perhaps a long period of time, the street facing parking lots will disappear from 33rd. The existing properties that are still setup like this are not new and as time passes and the area densifies the properties will be redeveloped. The property owners will eventually not be able to justify using up so much of their land for vehicle parking when they could redevelop it and maximize their property's earning potential. Even if it is some of the only off street parking in the area, you can only charge so much for parking, to me the economics will push this across the finish line.
badc0ffee
Active Member
Could the city use eminent domain to build the rest of the alley? It looks like the ROW is just parking lots and a retaining wall/fence. Won't be cheap, but won't be too costly, either, and no buildings would be lost.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
I am sure they can - but a bigger question might be why we need this circulation at all. A right-of-way is already set aside to access the parcel from the alley.
It would cost zero dollars if the city just had two rules:
1. Don't allow curb cuts over Main Street sidewalks.
2. Allow trucks to reverse.
I am pretty sure #2 isn't a thing, so all they got to do is actively enforce #1? It's just a bar, it's not an regional amazon distribution hub with a hundred semis an hour. Bars all over the planet exist without through-lane lane access.
The problem we are trying to solve here by keeping truck circulation is imaginary and is detrimental to the entire point of the development.
Calgcouver
Active Member
Wouldn't even need the trucks to reverse if they created a turning head on the SW corner of the subject parcel that could accommodate an SU-9 truck's turning radius and submit a swept path analysis to show it works, i don't see why that wouldn't be acceptable design to accommodate truck loading without the need for another curb cut onto 33rd.
badc0ffee
Active Member
While it would remove the need for both driveways, it seems to me that a turning head (reminds me of railway wye) would shrink the size of the parcel they could develop. Whereas the alley would allow the parcel to be used to its full potential.