News   Apr 03, 2020
Pastel Morning
 5.7K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 7.4K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Soon to be Gone
 4.4K     0 

Urban Development and Proposals Discussion

8th street already has a design proposal. They just haven't funded its reconstruction yet. As far as I know, 10 ave does not have a design proposal. I agree that it is a higher priority than Stephen Ave, but it's probably best left until the Green line is worked out. Same goes for 11th and 12th ave. 4th street between 10th and 17th could definitely use an update as well.

I suspect the fact that the business association is covering half the cost is the reason that Stephen Avenue is being prioritized and getting a high-profile design firm.
 
Does the scope of the Stephen Ave design end at 5th St? The City should look at extending it to 8th St or maybe all of the way to Mewata
 
DougB said:
Does the scope of the Stephen Ave design end at 5th St? The City should look at extending it to 8th St or maybe all of the way to Mewata
Click to expand...
According to the city's website, there are (3) 'character' area
Olympic Plaza to 3 St SW
3 St to 8 St SW
8 St to 11 St SW

I assume they are thinking of varying the designs in each of these areas.
 
Stephen Ave. needs a major update and fast. It’s the cities most famous and unique street. A complete redesign of the streetscape is crucial to keeping it the cities premier street. If done right and it attracts more people at all hours of the day, It will also help The Core Mall as well.

I’d love to see high quality sidewalks and paving, beautiful streetlights and benches, fountains, patios and bistros. I’d love for it to have a modern European flavour.
 
This is their recently released proposal for Copenhagen's central square. So I'm pretty hopeful about this team and this project for Stephen Ave.

20190524_WITHOUT-TOWER-web.jpg




Here's some work they've completed in other cities...

Moscow Riverfront...

737549_63714.jpg




"The Melbourne Miracle"...

474229_310538.jpg




San Francisco...

567686_262685.jpg




Copenhagen...

HIGH674581_210687.jpg




www.cladglobal.com

Feature: Jan Gehl on 50 years of battling to make our cities more people-friendly | CLAD

Sixteen years ago Jan Gehl and Helle Søholt teamed up to launch Gehl Architects, with the ambition of designing more people-friendly cities. Kath Hudson finds out about their approach and achievements
www.cladglobal.com
 
Melborne looks great but Copenhagen, Moscow, and San Francisco makes me dread a repeat of what happened to Devonian Gardens. An aging but lush and interesting space turned into sterile 2010s mall planters, cold walkways, contemporary structures that won't age well, etc. Just an overall cold feel. At least for the moment, there are some classical components such as the columns by HBC and the old fashioned lamp posts etc. that are more timeless.

The structures and styling from those Moscow Riverfront and San Francisco pictures might look okay but you have to remember that Calgary's Century Gardens and other brutalist public spaces also looked very modern and exciting in the 60s/70s.
 
Skyfire said:
Melborne looks great but Copenhagen, Moscow, and San Francisco makes me dread a repeat of what happened to Devonian Gardens. An aging but lush and interesting space turned into sterile 2010s mall planters, cold walkways, contemporary structures that won't age well, etc. Just an overall cold feel. At least for the moment, there are some classical components such as the columns by HBC and the old fashioned lamp posts etc. that are more timeless.

The structures and styling from those Moscow Riverfront and San Francisco pictures might look okay but you have to remember that Calgary's Century Gardens and other brutalist public spaces also looked very modern and exciting in the 60s/70s.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing, and the Melbourne one was already good to begin with, they didn't really do anything. I don't find the other visions or completed projects that great to be honest.
 
Exciting news for Stephen Ave - even if actual development is years away.

What I would love to try: a car-free/car-lite, pedestrian-oriented street East-West or North-South into the Beltline and on a street with much more a residential flavour, it would give the local debate more ammunition of what could/should be in our street designs. I would be stoked for a conversion of a side street on any of the low traffic, high pedestrian roads (15th, 14th, 13th Ave + Centre, 2nd, 6th, 7th, 9th, 10th, 12th Streets) to reflect their current reality, let alone their future one of fewer and fewer cars. There will always be some, sure, but there is no future in which these roads will ever require more car space than they already have. Over 50% of people along these streets report using active modes to get around already and their is no regional argument for capacity that applies on the local roads.

Ideal scenario: 1 east-west pedestrian-only / pedestrian-mostly street (i.e. Stephen Ave) and one north-south pedestrian-only / pedestrian-mostly street connecting to the Beltline where people actually live at density (as opposed to another 3rd Street SW scenario). If it's too radical to take the whole thing of a north-south access, take half: imagine a high-quality 2 lane wide cycle-track, pedestrian priority street along the east side of 5th Street from 17th Ave to Stephen? That would be immensely popular and well used.

A few design considerations any new pedestrian street should have:
  • Signal priority, particularly against car-sewer roads (9th, 10th, 11th, 12th Avenues)
  • Raised crosswalks so no grade change for pedestrians or cyclists from one end to the other at all
  • Trees that survive and are set up for success with better bio-swales and planters
  • Sidewalk travelling areas that are 2 - 4X wider than currently, but consistent for the full length
  • Benches
 
darwink said:
Why? Is it an obstacle? We could make the street taxi/rideshare/delivery vehicles only. Plus it would make the mental barrier for extending an impoved streetscape westward that much higher, with parkades and hotels being accessed from 8th.
Click to expand...
It's not an obstacle, it just takes away from the potential of the street in my opinion. Any improvement they are going to do will be minor unless there can be permanent changes in the street area (art installations, a fountain for summertime, things like that...). The downside to banning cars is for people trying to find parking, the one ways and traffic ban on 7th mean large circles to get back to where you were.
 
darwink said:
Why? Is it an obstacle? We could make the street taxi/rideshare/delivery vehicles only. Plus it would make the mental barrier for extending an impoved streetscape westward that much higher, with parkades and hotels being accessed from 8th.
Click to expand...
It's a massive obstacle.

For one thing, it makes any large-scale improvements (benches, fountains, planters, picnic tables,...) impossible because the entire middle of the street needs to be open and clear. It also makes temporary installations impractical -- beakerhead is a great example -- because everything needs to be cleared by 6 PM. During the busiest hour of Beakerhead, people are starting to take down anything that might be in the vehicle right-of-way. So it's an obstacle to all kinds of activity.

I roughly measured a cross-section (by The Unicorn) yesterday. To my (approximate) count, Stephen Ave was 62 feet wide. The road lane is 14 feet wide and the parking lane 10 feet. So that's 24/62 = 38% of the gross space. But that's a huge understatement. The first thing is that there is a substantial "furniture zone" on either side of the roadway that is filled with light posts, benches, garbage cans and the like. It's important stuff, but basically makes about 3 feet on either side of the road useless for walking down the street. Then there are the patios (and pseudo-patios like Earl's extension). The Unicorn's patio is 12 feet wide. Patios are great, and they contribute to the feel of Stephen Avenue, and I'd increase rather than decrease them. But on a section with two twelve foot patios and the three foot furniture strip on either side of the roadway, there's only 32 feet left. When the road is open, it takes 24/32 = 75% of the useful space. And the remaining space is a narrow 4 foot strip, which is too narrow for wider pedestrians to pass each other (e.g. strollers, a couple holding hands, a wheelchair user).

And the vehicle traffic is already mostly taxi/TNC already, which is silly when there's a taxi stand basically on every single cross-street. (If I were in charge, I'd add taxi stands in the parking on the east side of 3rd St and in part of the Glenbow loading dock just to make every cross street have taxi coverage.) We're blocking 3/4 of the useful width of the street so that people don't have to walk less than half a block to get their cab or ride (and to park less than 20 cars per block). Vehicle traffic is a huge obstacle.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top