Alex_YYC
Senior Member
Sidewalk construction complete and a business open!
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Is that just loose gravel/rocks on the south side between the sidewalk and building? Is that the final treatment?
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Looks like it
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Ugh.
I am trying to think of any urban city with a walkable retail main street in a city that does loose gravel/rocks so close to the active frontage and can't think of any. It bleaches the area from easy conversion in the future for any other purpose or as a means for mobility. Does no one imagine that sidewalks often have two people that need to pass each other? Or how someone visiting the building would walk between the bike rack and the door? In both cases a person would have to exit the sidewalk into a soft gravel bed. Seems like a non-issue to some, but almost unheard of in any other city and a real nuissance for anyone with mobility challenges or carrying heavy objects.
It's like some sort of combo of ground permeability rules and cheapness resulted in a mess that checks the boxes but complete undermines the pedestrian experience. In combo with all the grade changes to enter and exit, this development is a classic how to pretend to be pedestrian-oriented while missing the mark on all the details. Scale, form and materials all seem just fine otherwise -its those fine grain details that really were missed.
Hell, the mail boxes can't even stand up straight.
I am trying to think of any urban city with a walkable retail main street in a city that does loose gravel/rocks so close to the active frontage and can't think of any. It bleaches the area from easy conversion in the future for any other purpose or as a means for mobility. Does no one imagine that sidewalks often have two people that need to pass each other? Or how someone visiting the building would walk between the bike rack and the door? In both cases a person would have to exit the sidewalk into a soft gravel bed. Seems like a non-issue to some, but almost unheard of in any other city and a real nuissance for anyone with mobility challenges or carrying heavy objects.
It's like some sort of combo of ground permeability rules and cheapness resulted in a mess that checks the boxes but complete undermines the pedestrian experience. In combo with all the grade changes to enter and exit, this development is a classic how to pretend to be pedestrian-oriented while missing the mark on all the details. Scale, form and materials all seem just fine otherwise -its those fine grain details that really were missed.
Hell, the mail boxes can't even stand up straight.
The Familia
Active Member
Wow that is terrible! Guess where all those loose rocks will end up? Kicked and thrown around all over the sidewalk and road making it even harder to navigate both modes of transportation. If one of those rocks ends up on the street and shaders my windshield I’ll sue them.
Alex_YYC
Senior Member
Wolf Den fits into the block well.
zagox
Active Member
Calgcouver
Active Member
One thing that I keep hearing from potential building owners and property owners in Calgary is that they want the commercial to be standalone from the residential component. Most of the operators seem to specialize in res or comm which makes forward sales of vertical mixed use projects (especially on small projects) hard here, because they have limited portfolios and staff. Big reason for limited push for mixed use in greenfield developments is what I’m seeing and aware of.
MissingMiddle
Active Member
Honest question: Is it really that hard to just sell the commercial and residential portions of the building to different operators?
Calgcouver
Active Member
I wouldn't say so, but it just isn't what a lot of them seem to want for one reason or another. Maybe it is "complicated" agreements and arrangements with condo board over parking/garbage removal/condo docs etc that the commercial owners don't like.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
I would be curious if there's a comparative study out there from a city or country that has mixed-use commercial/residential as a default and what they do - costs always need to be shared but seems some places are just able to get on with it with little fanfare and fewer "for lease" signs.
There does seem to be a particularly challenge in newer/new-ish buildings, perhaps it's not as much a real issue as more of just a perception as it takes a while for leases, owners and operators to stabilize their day-to-day. 20 years on buildings seem to sort it out.
Would be neat to compare say a European residential/retail cost sharing agreement with a Calgary or Canadian example.