Shawnessy Station | 62.5m | 18s | Telsec I S2 Architecture

gsunnyg said:
Give me a pen and paper and I'll lay out a 10x better design on that parcel. When the developer has a suburban mindset, we're gonna get these sort of mediocre designs. If they really wanted to include public parking for suburban drivers, they could have easily built a 3-4 story above grade parkade like seen in other cities across Canada. That would allow even more land available to develop more units on, particularly if it was laid out in a grid format. This is nothing but a lazy design and maximizing profit through minimal effort on the developer's part. If something like this was presented to any metro Vancouver council, especially next to a transit station, it'd be straight chucked into the garbadge bin.
Click to expand...
Sure you could build above ground parking, but with who's money? It's extra cost to build a really high density development on parcel that completely cut off from everything, and surrounded by hundreds of other parcels filled with piles of surface parking. I think this proposal is as good as can be expected for a developer who is not trying to lose money with a challenging, cut off parcel like this one.

The opportunity for a good TOD was blown decades ago when they designed the whole layout, which I think may have come before the train was extended that far. Either way, the road layout and large superstore with surface parking across from the train station effectively killed it. If there is any chance of saving the opportunity for a TOD the city would need tout in a road that runs along side the tracks , and have development from onto that road, and straighten Shawville (shown in blue)
Without that, any chance of a decent TOD is gone.

Capture.JPG


Dārayavauš said:
Agreed. They really need to stop allowing these kind of things to go through. Look at Westman Village, University District and West District. We can and are already doing better. I am hoping that they change their Phase 2 design. Phase 1 I still do not find that bad as a start. Hopefully we can somehow give feedback, and you could send your design for the rest of the area :)
Click to expand...
That's a tricky situation. The city could enforce developers to do better design, but this parcel has sat empty for decades, and could easily sit empty for another 40 years, if the city gets too restrictive. If this was Westbrook or another TOD area, I would want the city to push harder for better design, not sure I'd want to fight the battle for this particular lot.
 
Alex_YYC said:
Sure you could build above ground parking, but with who's money? It's extra cost to build a really high density development on parcel that completely cut off from everything, and surrounded by hundreds of other parcels filled with piles of surface parking. I think this proposal is as good as can be expected for a developer who is not trying to lose money with a challenging, cut off parcel like this one.

The opportunity for a good TOD was blown decades ago when they designed the whole layout, which I think may have come before the train was extended that far. Either way, the road layout and large superstore with surface parking across from the train station effectively killed it. If there is any chance of saving the opportunity for a TOD the city would need tout in a road that runs along side the tracks , and have development from onto that road, and straighten Shawville (shown in blue)
Without that, any chance of a decent TOD is gone.

View attachment 336587


That's a tricky situation. The city could enforce developers to do better design, but this parcel has sat empty for decades, and could easily sit empty for another 40 years, if the city gets too restrictive. If this was Westbrook or another TOD area, I would want the city to push harder for better design, not sure I'd want to fight the battle for this particular lot.
Click to expand...
See I'm for one with the thought that when you build something like this, you build long-term, 15-20 years from now when our population is much bigger. This area is very similar to Banff Trail and that has a way more ambitious plan even though it might be in a semi-urban/suburban setting. Let's say the developers were to build this as a denser TOD with a phased approach. The city could always come back and build better connectivity through roads and pathways if there is a substantial population in the area. We could also see further redevelopment on those surface parking lots as a spillover effect, leading to a unified vertical strip TOD. Superstore could be redeveloped to where it is raised at entrance level with a surface parking below the store (similar to Superstores and Walmarts in Vancouver and Toronto). Not to mention, if the entire area around this station was built into grid-lay-out of mid rises, the extra population density alone would help keep the area vibrant year-long, so if suburban folks were to use the services in the area, it would be an added bonus. Again, it's just my IMO, but this is a pure lazy design effort and I don't blame the developer as much as I blame the City. We set the bar so low, with 0 guidance policies for how TOD's should be built.

Is this plot of land ideal? No. Can it be turned around with a little bit of effort and creativity? Yes. I for one don't really care about this TOD because I'm never visiting the area but it's just setting a trend of mediocre designs around transit stations. Seeing how garbage the Saddleridge TOD turned out, I'm starting to think these sort of developments is what the City sets as a standard.
 
Last edited:
I would agree that it's better to wait if it's a more strategic location, like Westbrook, Brentwood, Chinook for example. This location I don't care about as much, and I agree with Alexyyc that possibility for a good TOD was ruined when they built the Superstore and designed the surrounding roads. The area isn't properly set up for a TOD, and makes we wonder if it's worth trying and force the developer into above ground parking and more density at this point? The area around the station is a write-off, and this proposal feels like losing an overtime game in hockey. At least we're salvaging a point out of it.
 
I get where @gsunnyg is coming from. City planning has screwed things up and made it difficult to do nice TODs, and from a logical point of view it makes sense to push for better because it's permanent once it's built. I just don't know if it's realistic to expect good quality TOD in that location, at least in my lifetime. Some sites like Westbrook, I think it's worth waiting out out. It worked for Bridgeland and East Village, but those are also great locations to build around.
 
Last edited:
Beltline_B said:
The good thing about Westbrook is, development around the area is taking place, or underway. Once things start to build up it'll make the main parcel more valuable, and also give the city more leverage to say no to proposals that are not cutting it.
Click to expand...
Too late I think.......
www.google.ca

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.ca www.google.ca
 
In this instance, the sidewalk might have been broken by vehicles driving up over it, using the large concrete lawn as a front parking lot. Seriously, this happens at our main TOD site. Usually 3-4 cars are parked up there like a front driveway.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top