News   Apr 03, 2020
Pastel Morning
 5.9K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 7.5K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Soon to be Gone
 4.5K     0 

Urban Development and Proposals Discussion

Silence&Motion said:
Why is that?
Click to expand...
Administrative and Council apathy? I have raised it on a number of applications personally, only to be told that the bylaw still stands, and that updating it would be too large of a project.

The one plus side is, if Edmonton Trail is to be the Neighbourhood Boulevard it is designated per the MDP/CTP, that space is needed to create a proper boulevard with nice sized street trees and furniture, then a 3.0m sidewalk that fronts up to the buildings. However, that is not typically constructed either. Just push the buildings back, because that is what has been done since the 60s. Very frustrating.
 
Ah, I thought he was asking about the original move from Stampede Park. Thanks for the clarification.
Rollerstud98 said:
There were something like 8 stables built that were never utilized either and torn down. Some bankruptcies involved. Credit crisis was the last nail in the coffin I think for the original plans.
Click to expand...
 
Silence&Motion said:
Why is that?
Click to expand...
Edmonton Tr. is a road that will likely require widening one day, either to add traffic or to accommodate transit. Centre street will get the LRT which could also affect Edmonton Tr. There are road widening setbacks that may be taken off in some areas, I wouldn't count on it in the inner city though.
 
Mountain Man said:
Edmonton Tr. is a road that will likely require widening one day, either to add traffic or to accommodate transit. Centre street will get the LRT which could also affect Edmonton Tr. There are road widening setbacks that may be taken off in some areas, I wouldn't count on it in the inner city though.
Click to expand...

Most of Toronto's inner city main streets are as narrow or narrower than Edmonton Trail and they handle more local density, traffic and transit ridership. Responsible city-building should not predicate itself on always reserving land for a just-in-case road widening. Four lanes on Edmonton Trail should be enough for any possible future worth aiming for in the inner city.
 
Toronto also has some moderate to severe traffic concerns. It's probably smart of Calgary to maintain these some of these wide boulevard widths into the future but, I just hate the look. There has to a better interim use even something crazy as adding retail in one storey blocks in front of new, midrise developments.
 
I recall that Toronto once forced setbacks on Dundas street for the purposes of widening the street, but then they came to their senses. Hopefully Calgary will too. The future of traffic management is getting people out of their cars, not making more room for cars.
 
Would the city be better widening Edmonton Trail now, and having a wide median in the centre with a few planters etc.. If widening was need someday down the road I would think it would be easier to take out the middle median section then to deal with the buildings and parcels at the sides.
 
Some bigger items at CPC next week. Full agenda here:
https://www.calgary.ca/PDA/pd/Docum...mission/agenda/2017/agenda-cpc-october-19.pdf

Item 5.01 (page 113/483): First phase of Eau Claire Mall redevelopment. DP drawings beginning on page 126.

Item 5.05 (page 307/483: Revised outline plan for Highland Park golf course.

Item 5.09 (page 379/483): Bentall Kennedy's mixed use tower in Eau Claire, on 3rd Ave and 6th Street. This is the former 3 Eau Claire site, now with a new design. DP drawings beginning on page 391. A good idea of the more unique profile can be seen on page 424. My first thought is a big foam finger, but that is just me....
 
MichaelS said:
So, there is another big one for the beltine, this time on the west side, at 12th ave and 11th Street SW (behind the Metropolitan):
https://developmentmap.calgary.ca/#property/DP2017-4645

2 buildings, 416 units. Cressey Developments (who in Calgary have partnered with Grovsner on Avenue),
Click to expand...
It'll be nice to have that empty lot filled. 416 units would probably be, what....two towers of around 20 floors each?
 
Surrealplaces said:
Would the city be better widening Edmonton Trail now, and having a wide median in the centre with a few planters etc.. If widening was need someday down the road I would think it would be easier to take out the middle median section then to deal with the buildings and parcels at the sides.
Click to expand...
Would be logical to me, would look better as well.


I don't think there is anything wrong with accommodating future vehicle traffic and keeping setbacks in the inner city for that purpose. Transit and other options should get more focus as the inner city densifies, but people are always going to want to drive here.
 
Mountain Man said:
Would be logical to me, would look better as well.


I don't think there is anything wrong with accommodating future vehicle traffic and keeping setbacks in the inner city for that purpose. Transit and other options should get more focus as the inner city densifies, but people are always going to want to drive here.
Click to expand...
Makes sense to me too. We can have our nice streetscapes now, and if the extra road space is never needed, we can continue to enjoy a nice boulevard style street.
 
Surrealplaces said:
That whole area is really filling in. Once the ring road is complete, you'll see the area really take off I think.
Click to expand...

...I seem to recall Trinity had their Ontario-based architect apply for DPs last fall and then, perhaps unwisely, advertised they'd be breaking ground this past spring, not realizing how frigging long it takes to get a DP approved in this town...then a re-fresh came out in June of this year that altered some land uses (I assumed as a response to the DP process)....I've been out of the DP info-loop lately, but has anything been approved/released?
 
I don’t recall seeing anything approved yet.
garp said:
...I seem to recall Trinity had their Ontario-based architect apply for DPs last fall and then, perhaps unwisely, advertised they'd be breaking ground this past spring, not realizing how frigging long it takes to get a DP approved in this town...then a re-fresh came out in June of this year that altered some land uses (I assumed as a response to the DP process)....I've been out of the DP info-loop lately, but has anything been approved/released?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top