Urban Development and Proposals Discussion

[kora]

Why isn't it a requirement for all condo buildings to have ground floor bike storage? How does that become the minimum and not the exception? Same goes for office buildings, I'm currently parking on P5 buried in a corner and have to contend with ridiculously steep parkade entrance / exits fighting with traffic.

It wasn't seen as important by people writing the policy. There are a few examples of main floor bike rooms in Calgary, but they are voluntarily built by developers. Because the policy is so weak on location, City staff have their hands tied.

Then there were the cases of buildings that didn't want to provide any bike parking at all. Still, they knew they had to because the bylaw required it. They got around the rules by calling their storage lockers bike parking, since technically lockers are big enough to put a bicycle inside.

 

[ByeByeBaby]

Eau Claire's current supply of developments are largely auto-oriented, fortress-style master plan blocks of towers and townhomes. Most have limited permeability and interaction with the pathway system. It's this weird irony - there's been tower and townhomes projects in Eau Claire for decades, demonstrating a level of demand to live here. But the way the buildings are designed, they seem to almost go out of their way to dissuade easy access for the residents to the amenity they (presumably) want to live nearby to.

Sure - there's some sidewalks and gates in the security fences, but I can't think of a better opportunity for true development/pathway integration in Eau Claire:

• bicycle garages that connect directly onto the pathway
• High quality connections through and around all developments
• Pathway-fronting retail and cafes

The demographics of Eau Claire are completely unlike much of the rest of the inner city; it's not another downtown community as much as a vertical Elbow Park.

Here's the average age of adults (20+) from the 2016 census for the inner city: - average age of adults is more informative because a 40-something couple with two kids has across everybody an average age in the early 20s.

Eau Claire is one of the few areas where the average adult is over 50 years of age, where a lot of the central city has an average age in the late 30s. I'm not surprised in general that an older community spends less time on outdoor sports, and the Eau Claire mentality is one where a condo tower is basically a gated community.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

The demographics of Eau Claire are completely unlike much of the rest of the inner city; it's not another downtown community as much as a vertical Elbow Park.

Here's the average age of adults (20+) from the 2016 census for the inner city: - average age of adults is more informative because a 40-something couple with two kids has across everybody an average age in the early 20s.
View attachment 384993

Eau Claire is one of the few areas where the average adult is over 50 years of age, where a lot of the central city has an average age in the late 30s. I'm not surprised in general that an older community spends less time on outdoor sports, and the Eau Claire mentality is one where a condo tower is basically a gated community.

Reads like a project is needed that has a variety of price points... What's existing in Eau Claire does have a very "executive" feel to it. Seeing the west end in the 45-50 range doesn't surprise me either. Can't just build communities for one group of people. 45-55 don't really go out and make a place vibrant (sorry if you're in that category) but at that age you're probably looking to save your last bit of money before you retire. I'm guilty of loving Vancouver for its level of vibrancy but I've stayed near Cole Harbour and its a deadzone at night likely for these same reasons as Eau Claire and Calgary's west end are. Whereas Vancouver's west end is buzzing, it has tons of little old condos and Multi-family.

 

[Surrealplaces]

Looks pretty good. Although I would like to see Center Street move away from parking lots facing the street. Especially with the green line (hopefully) coming

View attachment 384973View attachment 384974View attachment 384975

Would love that, Minus the front facing parking lot. The spider block up on 14th Street Southwest had the same plan originally and then it got reversed with the parking lot in the back. It looks like this isn't a whole new building though, but more of reno.

 

[Joborule]

I lived in Kensington for a few years and used that stretch of pathway a few times a week...I don't think I can ever recall seeing anyone going in or out of those gates. It's hard to articulate, but it's just a weird residential feeling there.

Eau Claire needs a main street where a fair amount of CRU's are added to current commercial buildings along the road to get life into the area during, and outside of work hours. 3rd Ave could be that street; where there could be restaurants, bars, shops that span from 6 St SW to Chinatown. Maybe the 3 Ave bike and pedestrian detour shouldn't be temporary, and become permanent to improve the pedestrian realm of the corridor.

 

[adamyyc]

Demolition may start soon for this one. Area has been fenced off.

Demolition has started.

 

[Chinook Arch]

Would love that, Minus the front facing parking lot. The spider block up on 14th Street Southwest had the same plan originally and then it got reversed with the parking lot in the back. It looks like this isn't a whole new building though, but more of reno.

If it was a new build I’d be pissed but this still an upgrade. I’ll take it.

 

[Disraeli]

Demolition has started.

View attachment 385079

Which project is this? Edit nvm I found it

 

[lemongrab]

I would be happy to be wrong - but I assume that in the design review rooms when a new river-fronting tower is proposed they spend their time on regular stuff like vehicle parkade circulations and trash pickup details rather than the design of pathway interaction. I have been in the Waterfront towers bicycle room before and it's pathway-adjacent location appears to have played zero impact to the design and accessibility of the bicycle room.

Imagine a review process that *required* pathway fronting properties to have their bicycle rooms connect directly and efficiently to the pathway system, just like how we require parkades to connect to streets

I bet at least 50% of bikes in bike rooms don't get touched once between the day someone moves in and moves out.

It would be nice if they could at least code for wider doors...ideally with automated buttons...and a window on the door so it doesn't feel like you're going to get Dextered in there.

 

[G888]

Do you guys think a 6 story wood frame 4.0 far is enough density for the beltline?

 

[darwink]

Do you guys think a 6 story wood frame 4.0 far is enough density for the beltline?

I think 4 far is higher than the 14 floor tower I am in which has zero retail.

And yeah. I think it is enough. There shouldn’t be a limit either way. In the Beltline it is pure land assembly and economic optimizations which dictate the height.

 

[Calgcouver]

Do you guys think a 6 story wood frame 4.0 far is enough density for the beltline?

Yes that would be perfect for the beltline

 

[Surrealplaces]

Do you guys think a 6 story wood frame 4.0 far is enough density for the beltline?

Given the number of empty parking lots around the Beltline I’d be totally fine with 6 storey wood frame. We already have a large number of high-rises, it would be nice to fill The Beltline with more mid and low rises.

 

[Mountain Man]

Great size for the Beltline, not every site needs a tower!

 

[Calgcouver]

Street-oriented single-floor CRU building at 1404 16 Ave NW, next to the Oil Change place right next to 14th Street NW.

So now that we are starting to see street-oriented buildings along 16th Avenue that is classified as an Urban Main Street, what are the chances that the City begins allowing on-street parking on the northside of 16 Avenue to allow customers for businesses to park? I hope they don't wait for the entire streetscape master plans to be done, even temporary pedestrian bumpouts (painted with breakaway bollards like on 1st Ave NE) and new on-street parking signage could provide an interim solution and really improve parking and access for this new development and parking for existing businesses. In the interest of not just complaining and actually bringing and interim condition idea to the table:

With new applications coming in along 16th Ave, the City needs to show that they are committed to the principles of Main Streets and add on-street parking, and lower speed limits to begin combatting the dangerous and awful pedestrian experience and that they are committed to creating on-street parking and conditions that street-oriented buildings need. This type of condition should be implemented all along 16th Avenue from 4th Street NE to 19th Street NW. I think they should do it as cheap and cheerful as they possibly can, but I do think implementing on-street parking earlier would get people used to the changing condition, would provide much needed traffic calming for pedestrians and would provide additional parking for businesses.

Curious to see what others think as we start to see more street-oriented buildings come online, with the City making zero effort on changing the condition of the roadways, always being in favour of over-sized car sewers and free-flowing traffic lanes. Time to put up or shut up on Main Streets, City of Calgary! People will build street-oriented buildings if you improve the conditions of dangerous Stroads you call Urban Main Streets and make them more hospitable places to walk and be.