[ChazYEG]

Let me introduce you to the novel concept of underground parking. Am I really having to explain this ?!?!?!?!?

My dude... The costs of adding UG parking are substantial and could affect the whole feasibility of a project (or impact lease rates and reduce affordability). A few above ground parking stalls (which seems to be the case) for movers, visitors, etc are also not the end of the world.

 

[Gus Haynes]

Making an issue of a modest amount of surface parking on a site finally seeing some real TOD momentum after decades of stagnation is certainly... a choice.

When even the biggest urbanists here are saying "dial it back a bit, bro", you may need to reevaluate your priorities.

 

[David A]

I was about to say this. My condo has underground parking/storage for owners and ground level parking for visitors. Keeps the owner parking more secure, I don't want any of my neighbours random ass guests scoping out my parking stall/storage locker. But friends regularly appreciate not having to walk two blocks to the nearest street parking when visiting. Having most car storage underground but a little bit above ground is the ideal mix for these affordable 4-6 story tall buildings.

Yes, this is especially helpful for visitors in areas where there is limited street parking or very hard to find a spot on the street.

It is easier for visitors than trying to navigate a parkade they are not familiar with and better for security to limit access to the parkade to residents.

 

[Offworld]

I don't like it either, but there's little enough of it, and enough other positive 'place-making' type stuff, that I don't think it's a terrible thing.

Every modern underground parking I've seen (and I've in the North American real estate business for a few decades) has gated or ungated parking just inside the parkade entrance for guests, and then secure-ish gated parking for residents further into the parkade. In most progressive urban centres, zero on-site surface parking is permitted. Further, in some cases planners have been pushing zero guest parking now, and that includes zero underground guest stalls. A decade ago, I owned in a building like that too. People adapt. They find paid parking on the surrounding streets.

Do I honestly have to keep explaining this?

And for the record, I'm not some activist that has a hate-on for cars; I drive an internal combustion vehicle.

 

[ChazYEG]

Every modern underground parking I've seen (and I've in the North American real estate business for a few decades) has ungated parking just inside the parkade entrance for guests, and then secure-ish gated parking for residents further into the parkade. In most progressive urban centres, zero on-site surface parking is permitted. Further, in some cases planners have been pushing zero guest parking now, and that includes zero underground guest stalls. A decade ago, I owned in a building like that too. People adapt. They find paid parking on the surrounding streets.

Do I honestly have to keep explaining this?

And for the record, I'm not some activist that has a hate-on for cars; I drive an internal combustion vehicle.

Mate, why are you so worked up about this? The parking isn't street facing, there's not a sea of parking and the little there is doesn't detract at all from the overall quality of the building. Edmonton still is a very car-centric city and a move towards car free (and parking free), even in central-ish areas, ain't gonna happen quickly. 10-15 years ago we would've gotten a bunch of surface parking and a very suburban feel to anything built, even towers.
There's no need to go off the rails and fire at everyone here just because we're being reasonable with the expectations and with our assessment of the quality of this product.

 

[IanO]

A nice article in the current Edify about this project. Well done folks.

 

[archited]

Quite simply it has been done right.

 

[Pro.N]

Stadium Yards from today.

 

[SarcasticMarmot]

They have finished the redo of both parks at either end of the development. Looks like the main project was to lower the previously raised, hill like flora features and replace them with flat grass/trees. Whether that was to reduce maintenance costs or improve sightlines, I don't know.

 

[chrisvazquez7]

The mounds made it unique but I did always wonder about sightlines and people feeling unsafe. The new configuration will be fine in 60 years when those trees are fully grown.

 

[Avenuer]

The mounds made it unique but I did always wonder about sightlines and people feeling unsafe. The new configuration will be fine in 60 years when those trees are fully grown.

Those mounds were also full of weeds and did not look great as the mulch did not stay well on the slopes. This is a much better design and something Claude Cormier should've done in the first place.

 

[Edmcowboy11]

Too bad it's saying set to launch in 2028. sooner would be nicer

 

[archited]

It takes time to create construction documents and get DP and BP set in place.

 

[bodsbods9090]

It takes time to create construction documents and get DP and BP set in place.

3 years? Is that a typical timeline?

Have a feeling this is more a market/other projects thing for them rather than DP/BP thing.

 

[MacLac]

Land servicing to start in 2026 - so a year for that, with homes ready by 2028.....isn't that what "launch" means? So a year and a bit to build 200 homes....sounds good to me.....what am I missing here?