PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : Calgary pedestrian shopping districts



DizzyEdge
May 26, 2010, 11:18 PM
Not sure if there is already something like this, or if this is the right spot, but here you go. This is different than the retail thread, in this I wanted to discuss the various shopping districts/BRZs/Future BRZs.

Regardless of BRZ status, in my mind I can come up with:

Destinations
non-local residents say 'hey it's Saturday, let's go check out ___"

Stephen Avenue
Kensington
(Uptown) 17th Ave
4th Street (Broadway)
Chinatown
9th ave SE (Atlantic Avenue)
Future Destinations
locals go there, but people don't tend to go across town to check them out, although they may stop in if in the area. With gaps filled in they would end up in the top list, and we're pretty sure they will do so.


1st Ave SW (Scarth Street)
Marda Loop
1st Ave NE (Louisa) / Edmonton Trail (Barwis)
Edmonton Trail 7th Ave - 16th Ave

Potentials
These are areas similar to the list above, but so small or fragmented that it's uncertain if they will ever really expand, but it could be cool if they did so, or you know they will, but it could be decades. Basically either a cool small seed, or a larger mostly empty framework which could both spark a cool district.

Eau Claire market area
Centre Street North
16th Ave NW
11th St SW
19th St NW (1st Ave to 3rd ave)
14th St SW/NW
Bowness Rd BRZ
Parkdale Cres NW
Ogden Rd @ 68-72 Aves
Bowness Rd @ Montgomery
International Ave / 17th Ave SE
20th Ave @ 19 St NW
3rd st / Barclay Mall


I'm not including anything where there's plans, but nothing really on the ground, ie shopping areas in East Village, Ramsay Exchange, etc.

Did I miss/mis-classify anything?

ue
May 26, 2010, 11:58 PM
I'd argue 9th Ave is more of a pedestrian shopping district than Kensington which is more restaurant and bar focused. Marda Loop looks too tiny in it's commercial portion to be anything major like 17th or Stephen is.

Regardless Calgary has a fantastic urban scene for a city of merely 1.2 million inhabitants. I don't recall Tulsa or Providence or Sacramento having as much to do.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 12:07 AM
I'm probably being too specific with 'shopping', basically I'm speaking of pedestrian orientated commercial areas, that's what I should have named it, darnit. If a mod could change this to Calgary pedestrian commercial districts it would be appreciated.

ue
May 27, 2010, 12:13 AM
Or simply urban neighbourhoods, urban destinations, urban commercial nodes, urban districts, etc.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 12:22 AM
Well I'm specifically thinking of somewhat contiguous street frontages of pedestrian friendly commercial that are destinations. So pedestrian commercial seems to work, not sure about 'districts' but I'm not too worried about it.

Calgarian
May 27, 2010, 12:27 AM
They took down the Scarth Street signs on the lamp posts on 1St, can't remember what the replaced it with though.

ue
May 27, 2010, 12:32 AM
It's funny the English language hasn't seem to have coined a perfect term for what you're describing. It's either a really long expanse of words or a vague term like urban neighbourhood (which wouldn't have to be vibrant really).

I think urban district work as you wouldn't really call Crescent Hts or Parkhill an urban "district", but probably high trafficked and used urban neighbourhoods like Beltline, Inglewood, Downtown/Stephen Ave, and probably in the near future East Village and Bridgeland.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 12:49 AM
Yeah see, district isn't really right either, since I'm just referring to the commercial streets/strips.

ue
May 27, 2010, 1:11 AM
Kensington isn't 1 specific road ;). How can't neighbourhoods like Toronto's Kensington or Vancouver's Yaletown be included if there are types where there are multiple roads of commercial activity in Calgary...like Kensington, like Beltline, etc. You could probably call Atlantic Ave or Stephen Ave a small urban district, or you could say their neighbourhood and people would know that not the entire neighbourhood is teeming with life.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 1:25 AM
Fair enough

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 1:31 AM
They took down the Scarth Street signs on the lamp posts on 1St, can't remember what the replaced it with though.

Hmm interesting, I'll have to check that out later. I was hoping that would stick.

artvandelay
May 27, 2010, 6:15 AM
The only place I can think of that you're missing for potential is 3rd/Barclay Street, which was planned to be the major pedestrian link between Stephen and Eau Claire. Vibrancy never materialized there though, not enough retail frontage IMO.

Some stretches of 7th Ave might have potential as well, with the new stations and streetscaping etc.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 8:08 AM
The only place I can think of that you're missing for potential is 3rd/Barclay Street, which was planned to be the major pedestrian link between Stephen and Eau Claire. Vibrancy never materialized there though, not enough retail frontage IMO.

Some stretches of 7th Ave might have potential as well, with the new stations and streetscaping etc.

Good point. I sorta of left out 7th, particularly the 100 block since it will more or less become a part of Stephen Ave, but perhaps I shouldn't have. Barclay too, I'll add that one.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 8:18 AM
So what is there to do about this:

(Google pics)
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/8950/hsbc.jpg


http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/6650/bridgeland.jpg
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/4427/lookmanodoors.jpg

(my pic)
http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/8088/img0797qk.jpg

In case you're not sure what you're looking at, it's multi-bay retail buildings built in pedestrian oriented commercial areas, taken up by a single bank or financial institution. The last one even has reflective glazing.

Does it not matter? Is it a case that as new buildings go up some will naturally do worse for the streetscape than others?

Let the market decide? Is any new retail, even if it's a dead zone, a good thing as it will spark even more retail, some of which will be smaller more interesting shops?

What if it replaces older retail which does have multiple stores?

Should ARPs prevent this?

In the case of single stores moving into buildings meant for many (ie Shoppers), should there be bylaw restrictions on store area, or building size like this? http://www.newrules.org/retail/rules/store-size-caps

Radley77
May 27, 2010, 3:08 PM
I guess there is the question of market demand. If all the aforementioned areas were purely retail, then there would just be too much retail supply relative to demand and a lot of these businesses would go bankrupt. So, my thoughts are to have a vibrant district it takes a diverse range of uses to have a great community.

Bring in office workers, and they take off to the local restaurants; and fill the restaurants that may be empty during the day if the neighbourhood is primarily residential.

So, I think having some commercial space is tremendously important; accountants, lawyers, banks, physiotherapists, development companies etc.

What I don't like about the buildings is that they are very opaque. The windows are either tinted or covered in blinds, so you have little knowledge about the services offered unless a friend had recommended it to you.

An analogy of a vibrant retail business, that I think is in a poor building is Spolumbo's in Inglewood:

Google Maps - Spolumbo's in Inglewood (http://maps.google.ca/maps?oe=UTF-8&ie=UTF8&q=spolumbo's&fb=1&gl=ca&hq=spolumbo's&cid=0,0,798788925707064376&ei=44T-S8W7LpLsNfCW8Ts&ved=0CBUQnwIwAA&hnear=&ll=51.041178,-114.034148&spn=0,0.009624&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.041247,-114.03432&panoid=gjWhEx1T3JBZ8D-ycZEF8w&cbp=12,75.05,,0,5.2)

The design is very similar to the previous buildings, but to the person passing by in a vehichle on the street you would have no idea that it's often packed inside and there are tons of people getting fresh meat there.

My recommendation for these buildings would be have 'gateway entrances' or more entrances, and more windows that aren't covered in tinting or blinds. The better the interface with the public, the more likely the business to be a success irregardless of it is commercial or retail.

As for Signature Capital, it looks like it has gone bankrupt:


Court Order - Signature Capital (http://www.rsmrichter.com/downloads/pdf/insolvency_files/CaseID210/Motion%20Record%20-%20Signature%20-%20May%2019,%202010.pdf)

Good news seems to be $5.6 of the $7.8 million is being distributed, which might not be all that bad compared to the value that would have been lost in the stock market crash.

Rusty van Reddick
May 27, 2010, 3:52 PM
Dizzy, I would not hesitate to move Inglewood to your "destinations" list and to take it off your "future" list. In fact I'd say that when it comes to "destination" neighbourhoods in the city, as in your "It's Saturday, let's go hang out" example (which is a great way to describe this sort of thing, thanks), I'd put Uptown 17-Kensington-Inglewood as 1-2-3. On a nice day, though, it seems that none beats the pathways/Prince's Island Park nexus.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 4:16 PM
Dizzy, I would not hesitate to move Inglewood to your "destinations" list and to take it off your "future" list. In fact I'd say that when it comes to "destination" neighbourhoods in the city, as in your "It's Saturday, let's go hang out" example (which is a great way to describe this sort of thing, thanks), I'd put Uptown 17-Kensington-Inglewood as 1-2-3. On a nice day, though, it seems that none beats the pathways/Prince's Island Park nexus.

Inglewood was definitely one that I was on the fence on as far as 1 vs 2, there's a few of those hoods where *I* may not go there as a destination, but I wasn't sure if others might. Also I work in Inglewood so that is a bit of bias as far as me not also going there on the weekend.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 4:23 PM
Bring in office workers, and they take off to the local restaurants; and fill the restaurants that may be empty during the day if the neighbourhood is primarily residential."

This is a great point




I guess there is the question of market demand. If all the aforementioned areas were purely retail, then there would just be too much retail supply relative to demand and a lot of these businesses would go bankrupt.


Could you elaborate on this one? When I see a building like that Signature Capital one, I assume that it's 1 business vs 5 because the owner would rather have one lease payer to deal with than 5, not that there aren't 5 potential businesses which might wish to move in (or 10? or 15?)

I think that's one worry I have, that developers will only go for the low hanging single large business fruit, and will never build say a shop like the Signature Capital one hoping to fill the bays with 5 separate ones.

fusili
May 27, 2010, 4:49 PM
I would put 17th/4th Street/1st Street/11th Street/8th Street into a large single pedestrian area. 4th and 17th especially, I always walk down both, and think of them as a single area. There really isn't a gap between the two. 1st street just needs about a block and a half of retail to connect the two areas and 11th and 8th are really just extensions off of 17th. If you look at it as a single area it is actually massive. Probably about 25 blocks in total:

17th= 11 long blocks- From 2nd Street to 15th Street (11 blocks because no 3rd or 13th street)
4th= 13 short blocks- From 13th to 26th
11th= 3 short blocks- From 17th to 14th
8th= 7 short blocks- From 17th to 10th
1st= 5 short blocks- From 10th to 15th (gap between 11th and 12th though)

So in total you get about 25 blocks in total (if short blocks are half the length of long blocks). That compares to about 9 in Kensington and 4 in Inglewood.

So if you look at "pedestrian areas" you have basically 4 in and around the Centre City, Kensington in the NW, 17th/4th in the SW, Inglewood in the SE and Edmonton Trail in the NE. The other ones are more peripheral- Bowness (NW), International Avenue (E- debatable), Marda Loop (SW) etc. I would say that the focus shouldn't be on creating new pedestrian areas, but strengthening these existing ones. There are massive gaps in all of them, 17th/4th especially.


And a term you could use for it is "high street." I don't like the term, but it captures the essence of what you are talking about.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 4:54 PM
^^^

I agree that creating new ones shouldn't be any sort of priorty, as you say there are existing ones with big gaps, and tiny ones which have that advantage of being gap-free so they could grow naturally 'unattended'.

The reason I put the ones adjacent to 17th ave separately is it's just so unwieldy to say..make a suggestion about improvements etc to the entire 25 blocks when you're mostly thinking about 4th st, or 1st st, etc. Also some of them are separate BRZs. I get your point though.

Radley77
May 27, 2010, 6:41 PM
This is a great point





Could you elaborate on this one? When I see a building like that Signature Capital one, I assume that it's 1 business vs 5 because the owner would rather have one lease payer to deal with than 5, not that there aren't 5 potential businesses which might wish to move in (or 10? or 15?)

I think that's one worry I have, that developers will only go for the low hanging single large business fruit, and will never build say a shop like the Signature Capital one hoping to fill the bays with 5 separate ones.

Overall, I do think you are right that small scale businesses enhance walkability which adds to vibrancy and the overall utility of the neighbourhood. So, I think this is a very important 'best practice.' To the point that it is such an important best practice, that it almost should be included as a guidebook of how that street should evolve. Especially, in the scenario you pointed out, it's not just the Signature Capital building, but it's the long block of the school, and the long block of the church, that detracts from the walkability. I think it would be great if the communities of Crescent Heights, Renfrew, Bridgeland, and the CBD discussed a plan for making Edmonton Trail into a pedestrian boulevard.

However, I also think that owners seek to maximize rent, so they don't really care if it's six of one and a half dozen of the other, the point of the investment is to make sure that it is fully occupied, and maximizes capitalization rate. To that end, overregulation may preclude a needed service from being built in a community if the businesses needs are not met by preexisting forms of buildings in the neighbourhood. Another reason this may happen (single tenant buildings) is that it may be easier for banks to lend to developers based on a single tenant they view as more stable, then say a handful of small businesses that they don't understand the credit history and operational history. This is a bit of a chicken and egg scenario, a community might not get a building that is desired initially, but in the end it may find a more desirable use in the future. Revitalization\retrofitting, in of itself, I think can be just as important to communities as great initial designs.

Also, when speaking of supply relative to demand, say there are 9 blocks along that strip, and if each block had 20 businesses on both sides, that would be 360 businesses in that area. Chinook Centre by comparison has 200+ stores, so there probably just isn't enough demand for retail in that area to warrant stong regulations regarding the minimum number of occupants per structure.

I STRONGLY PREFER a walkable retail district with smaller shops, yet I think it is also the diversity of uses that makes a neighbourhood great. And that means letting the market try to meet the demand as EASILY as possible.

There are plenty of retirees in Bridgelands that form an older cohort that I think use these financial services, and that is perhaps a specialization point for Bridgeland wherein seniors probably drive more and require more access to financial services to manage their retirement. Great communities are also built on their ability to specialize as distinct nodes (i.e. Inglewood: furniture and home decor, 17 Avenue: best pubs and patios). I think overprescription of any particular building style, or any mandates regarding single tenant buildings would infringe on a community's and businesses ability to specialize.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 7:22 PM
I guess it's always a juggling act, juggling between chain stores vs indies, vs possibly regulating retail size vs possibly putting up barriers to new stores in the process.

The chain stores vs indies is important I think, if one wants a commercial strip to be a destination (maybe one doesn't?) then you need a certain amount of indie stores, or non-locals will just hit the same chains closer to home.

fusili
May 27, 2010, 7:34 PM
I STRONGLY PREFER a walkable retail district with smaller shops, yet I think it is also the diversity of uses that makes a neighbourhood great. And that means letting the market try to meet the demand as EASILY as possible.

There are plenty of retirees in Bridgelands that form an older cohort that I think use these financial services, and that is perhaps a specialization point for Bridgeland wherein seniors probably drive more and require more access to financial services to manage their retirement. Great communities are also built on their ability to specialize as distinct nodes (i.e. Inglewood: furniture and home decor, 17 Avenue: best pubs and patios). I think overprescription of any particular building style, or any mandates regarding single tenant buildings would infringe on a community's and businesses ability to specialize.

Great response. Fully agree. With regards to the first bolded text, I have to say I agree completely. Let's not try and force something to happen, let's let it happen naturally. In many cases a mix of large and small stores works really well on a single street. Large stores generate traffic because they are typically basic needs stores (groceries, pharmacies even electronics) that act as a draw. The smaller stores basically capitalize off the pedestrian traffic and the concentration of stores in the area.

And the second point is also well thought out. Preventing large stores will only inhibit having things like London Drugs and Shoppers, which are necessary for basic needs. There will never be a case of nothing but large format stores on a pedestrian street because the demand for these stores just isn't high enough to justify more than a few on a single street.

And finally, with regards to 17th, I would say it has several specialties. Restaurants and pubs are the largest group, but fashion is right up there, as are specialty product shops and coffee shops. All in all it has a great mix.

Radley77
May 27, 2010, 8:34 PM
I guess it's always a juggling act, juggling between chain stores vs indies, vs possibly regulating retail size vs possibly putting up barriers to new stores in the process.

The chain stores vs indies is important I think, if one wants a commercial strip to be a destination (maybe one doesn't?) then you need a certain amount of indie stores, or non-locals will just hit the same chains closer to home.

I agree that what I think you are trying to say is that specialization is important in order to have a regional draw. Specialized indy stores draw in regional people due to the unique stores they offer. When you clump a bunch of indy stores together, like Inglewood's home decor area, you have a greater number of people coming then would come if it was a stand-alone specialized store.

Chain stores typically survive if it can offer a cheaper product at a higher convenience. Indy stores survive because they better know the market rent, can leverage existing community relationships, better understand a communities specialized needs and meet that with superior products and services.

In most cases, I don't see chain stores as competing with indy stores unless the products and services offered are peerless (like a gas station). Suffice it to say, diversity is essential to great communities.

What I think would help the richness of the indy stores, is to accelerate and standardize what people's perceptions of these areas are so that better node clusters are formed that create more of a regional draw. This may also be that indy stores pool resources to form a partnership to better market the group.

hulkrogan
May 27, 2010, 9:08 PM
What are the odds that the Signature Capital space gets walled up and seperated and leased out to smaller tenants?

It seems now that it's set up the way it is, it will be prone to having the same crappy situation repeated.

DizzyEdge
May 27, 2010, 9:09 PM
What are the odds that the Signature Capital space gets walled up and seperated and leased out to smaller tenants?

It seems now that it's set up the way it is, it will be prone to having the same crappy situation repeated.

Yeah, that is the hope, that it will revert back to it's as-built layout.

Too bad about the Disney-riffic fake-itecture though.

hulkrogan
May 27, 2010, 9:24 PM
Yeah, that is the hope, that it will revert back to it's as-built layout.

Too bad about the Disney-riffic fake-itecture though.

Agreed. It would be cooler looking if they never did any exterior maintenance and just let it crack/fade to something that fits in.

DizzyEdge
May 28, 2010, 9:15 AM
Re: the mix of types of retail on a shopping street, one article I was just reading mentioned "Daily goods shopping" vs "recreational shopping". I think those are good terms, and a successful destination should have a well balanced mix of both.

DizzyEdge
Jun 14, 2010, 5:55 AM
I took a walk down Centre street today, and noticed for the first time that almost the entire strip south of 16th Ave has ridiculously wide sidewalks, I don't think I saw a single building that wasn't set back to allow them, including the 1930's Tigerstedt block so the city must have taken that ROW a long time ago. Some pics I took:


http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/3886/img1563b.jpg
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/3589/img1562le.jpg
http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/4663/img1552wz.jpg
http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/3171/img1551f.jpg
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/9716/img1549l.jpg
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/408/img1548f.jpg
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/5020/img1546v.jpg

You get the idea. At first I thought wow these are so wide.. that it makes the whole place look so barren, but then I realized that Centre could develop into a Stephen Ave like strip with sidewalk seating, produce, flowers, racks of clothes, etc out on the sidewalk without impeding pedestrians at all nor needing future redevelopment to accomplish that.


Some sites didn't have as wide a sidewalk, but the 'structures' they had were what I would consider temporary, such as more permanent patios
http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/579/img1567p.jpg
http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/193/img1550g.jpg

Or grassy areas between the walk and parking, this was often the case when the buildings were far far set back.

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/6282/img1553n.jpg

Even the 1932 Tigerstedt building had the huge setback, and I see a bunch of the retail bays have gone from all but one being empty to what looks like at least 4 of the 7 bays being used.
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/9826/img1554d.jpg
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/8475/img1555y.jpg
http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/1903/img1557bo.jpg


Now I know this site was set to be redeveloped, but I personally think it's a bit of a mistake for a few reasons. Firstly, this is probably one of only two buildings on Centre street north of the bridge which has enough heritage value to be inventoried, and in fact I believe, but can't find the file to verify, that the city did indeed inventory it, but the owner received the letter a day or two after they submitted the LUA, so the city agreed to not consider the new classification for this proposal.

As far as I know the only example of a 20s-30s 'strip mall' in the city. I know the Crescent Heights CA wants the development to set an example for all future Centre Street development, but is tearing down a heritage building really the example to set? I fully encourage densification (to make those sidewalks full of people and interesting sights a reality), but there are many many blocks that don't have heritage structures, and don't have 7+ retail bays (I believe the liquor store stand alone building was to be included in any redevelopment, so that's 6-9 bays). The building takes up slightly less than half the lot it sits on as shown:

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/9079/img1556iy.jpg

and as you go south the other buildings which make up the mall (there's 5 but a shared facade) have even less depth into the back lot. I'm sure that some creative mixing of new and old could be accomplished, even if they removed some of the back half of the strip to allow for more room for the new higher density structure. They seem to be able to accomplish it in other cities so not sure why it would be difficult here.

Anyway, in a nutshell, wide sidewalks good, tearing down Tigerstedt bad :)

bob1954
Jun 14, 2010, 7:05 AM
Nice looking '66 or '67 dodge in the one photo!

DizzyEdge
Jun 14, 2010, 7:28 AM
hah, thanks for pointing that out, I didn't even see it.

fusili
Jun 14, 2010, 4:58 PM
Agreed on the sidewalk widths. Having that ROW widening setback could prove to be advantageous. Make it into an extra wide sidewalk and landscape it properly (i.e. don't put stuff in the middle of the walking path like sandwich boards or posts, trees on the curb edge). Centre Street north has huge potential to be a great pedestrian area. It just needs the right public realm improvements.

Wooster
Jun 14, 2010, 6:09 PM
The good thing about centre street is that its wide ROW gives it a lot of flexibility to transform it. Sidewalks could be widened and totally reconfigured with new landscaping, full tree planting, improved sidewalks and street furniture etc. Also, the extra-wide curb lane could provide an opportunity to create a nice dedicated bike lane.

The corridor basically needs a total rethink to make it more balanced and more functional for all modes of transportation. If it's going to build up, the street needs to feel less like a thoroughfare and more like a green, pedestrian-friendly street.

Basically this kind of transformation (from the Calgary Transportation Plan)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/CTP4.jpg

fusili
Jun 14, 2010, 6:22 PM
The good thing about centre street is that its wide ROW gives it a lot of flexibility to transform it. Sidewalks could be widened and totally reconfigured with new landscaping, full tree planting, improved sidewalks and street furniture etc. Also, the extra-wide curb lane could provide an opportunity to create a nice dedicated bike lane.

The corridor basically needs a total rethink to make it more balanced and more functional for all modes of transportation. If it's going to build up, the street needs to feel less like a thoroughfare and more like a green, pedestrian-friendly street.


Exactly. The greatest difficulty I see is fitting in a transit ROW on Centre Street as it only has 4 lanes (16th avenue is massive and could have one lane dedicated in each direction to transit). Which is why a subway is much more preferable than a streetcar. As you have said before, Centre Street needs a corridor plan. A consistent high quality sidewalk all the way from 7th Avenue to 28th needs to be implemented, medium density mixed use needs to be approved for the entire corridor, transit needs to be upgraded (both the ROW and the number/quality of stops) and the surrounding residential areas need to be zoned for increased density (something in the range of 3 FAR or so).

Centre Street/16th Avenue is perfect for redevelopment:
- Grid Street Pattern makes for easier land consolidation, building layout and pedestrian access
- Existing BRT into Downtown
- Proximity to SAIT, Downtown, Foothills Hospital
- Wide ROW on 16th Avenue

When is the city going to realize this and start the ball rolling?

MichaelS
Jun 14, 2010, 6:46 PM
As mentioned in another thread, there is already a new 16th Ave ARP:
http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/sixteen_avenue_north_study/sixteen_avenue_north_study_one.pdf

fusili
Jun 14, 2010, 7:06 PM
As mentioned in another thread, there is already a new 16th Ave ARP:
http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/sixteen_avenue_north_study/sixteen_avenue_north_study_one.pdf

Thanks Michael. I kind of remembered the 16th Avenue study, but I was talking more about a Centre Street corridor study. I believe it is the more important corridor, as it is the one that leads to the downtown.

DizzyEdge
Jun 14, 2010, 7:37 PM
I would like to see Centre Street get a similar treatment that 16th Ave did. Being that is is the really the grand entry point into downtown, it should look the part.

Calgarian
Jun 14, 2010, 7:53 PM
A Centre Street corridor improvement would be fantastic, that street has so much potential.

DizzyEdge
Jun 14, 2010, 8:08 PM
^^ and unlike 16th ave, the expensive part (well in my mind) of expropriating properties to allow sidewalk widening and such is completely unneeded. so it would simply be a branding and consistent design of the sidewalk realm. Plus perhaps something along the centre of the road but I'm not sure if that's needed or desired.

CorporateWhore
Jun 14, 2010, 9:09 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/CTP4.jpg

Funny how even in their ideal world, they still envision Calgary full of truck's and SUV's. I guess some things don't change.

MichaelS
Jun 15, 2010, 1:01 AM
^^ and unlike 16th ave, the expensive part (well in my mind) of expropriating properties to allow sidewalk widening and such is completely unneeded. so it would simply be a branding and consistent design of the sidewalk realm. Plus perhaps something along the centre of the road but I'm not sure if that's needed or desired.

I agree that Centre needs the same treatment as 16th. But I also agree that it would be easier to implement. Is there a BRZ there? If not, would that be enough to do the "branding" needed to bring it up to speed?

kw5150
Jun 28, 2010, 5:34 PM
Man, does 17th ave need an overhaul!! There is garbage everywhere and people speeding like they are driving race cars. I really cant believe it looks like such a shithole now. On Saturday it was very alive but Sunday night it looked disgusting. I will be taking the garbage matter into my own hands if it is not cleaned up. When are those sidewalks going to be widened?

I do like the fact that the wesy end seems to be gaining popularity now. With a couple new restaurants it would be great.

srperrycgy
Jun 28, 2010, 5:40 PM
Complain to the City using 311 or send tweets to Ald. Mar (aldjohnmar).

kw5150
Jun 28, 2010, 5:51 PM
I thought the alderman was Kent hehr......lol. That is my next step

srperrycgy
Jun 28, 2010, 5:54 PM
I thought the alderman was Kent hehr......lol. That is my next step

:rolleyes: The MLA is Kent Hehr, but he couldn't help with a request like this.

fusili
Jun 28, 2010, 6:20 PM
Man, does 17th ave need an overhaul!! There is garbage everywhere and people speeding like they are driving race cars. I really cant believe it looks like such a shithole now. On Saturday it was very alive but Sunday night it looked disgusting. I will be taking the garbage matter into my own hands if it is not cleaned up. When are those sidewalks going to be widened?

I do like the fact that the wesy end seems to be gaining popularity now. With a couple new restaurants it would be great.

The sidewalks are being widened? First I ever heard of this.

Agree with the noise from cars.

Rusty van Reddick
Jun 28, 2010, 6:27 PM
Man, does 17th ave need an overhaul!! There is garbage everywhere and people speeding like they are driving race cars. I really cant believe it looks like such a shithole now. On Saturday it was very alive but Sunday night it looked disgusting. I will be taking the garbage matter into my own hands if it is not cleaned up. When are those sidewalks going to be widened?

I do like the fact that the wesy end seems to be gaining popularity now. With a couple new restaurants it would be great.

Have you ever been on Queen West on a nice summer day? The garbage cans overflow everywhere- that's life on a vibrant urban strip. I'm on 17th every single day and have no idea what you're complaining about.

fusili
Jun 28, 2010, 6:38 PM
Have you ever been on Queen West on a nice summer day? The garbage cans overflow everywhere- that's life on a vibrant urban strip. I'm on 17th every single day and have no idea what you're complaining about.

Yup, me too. Not every day, but almost every other day. It is actually quite clean. More bins and more regular emptying wouldn't hurt though.

kw5150
Jun 28, 2010, 6:55 PM
:rolleyes: The MLA is Kent Hehr, but he couldn't help with a request like this.

I have written my Alderman. Hopefully he is having a good day today and agrees with my comments.

kw5150
Jun 28, 2010, 7:22 PM
Have you ever been on Queen West on a nice summer day? The garbage cans overflow everywhere- that's life on a vibrant urban strip. I'm on 17th every single day and have no idea what you're complaining about.

I am no longer settling for "thats life" kind of environment. I have heard people use that expression these days way too much. Anyway, I hope you are having a good day and I am still going to pick up garbage when I see it.